INSTITUTIONAL  EXPENDITURES 


IN  THE 

STATE  BUDGETS  of  IOWA 


FRANK  I.  HERRIOTT 


Reprint  from  Bulletin  o/  Iowa  State  Institutions 


V\^’^ 
'A  > 


INSTITUTIONAL  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE  STATE  BUDGETS 

OF  IOWA. 


By  Frank  I.  Herriolt,  Ph.  D. 

During  the  past  twenty  five  years  a constantly  increasing  amount 
of  attention  has  been  given  both  in  political  discussion  and  in  schol- 
astic investigation  to  the  problems  of  our  public  finance  as  they  are 
exhibited  in  our  local,  state,  and  federal  governments.  But  for  the 
most  i)art  public  interest  has  centered  in  the  phenomena  of  either  our 
national  or  our  municipal  governments ; and  of  late  it  has  been  con- 
cerned chiefiy  with  questions  involved  in  the  methods  of  raising  the 
revenue  wherewith  to  carry  on  the  multitudinous  activities,  now- 
adays performed  by  or  dependent  on  government.  The  state  budgets 
of  our  several  commonwealths  have  been  almost  ignored  by  publicists 
and  scientific  students  of  finance  except  in  so  far  as  the  consideration 
of  the  problems  of  taxation  have  involved  the  states’  sources  of  in- 
come ; for  the  reason  no  doubt  that  the  expense  accounts  of  our  fed- 
eral and  local  governments  have  become  so  enormous  as  to  be  oppres- 
sive and  to  arouse  anxiety,  and  in  consequence  they  have  well-nigh 
absorbed  public  interest.  In  recent  years,  however,  the  mismanage- 
ment and  waste  of  public  revenue  accompanied  by  more  or  less  per- 
version of  state  funds  and  functions  to  private  or  political  uses  have 
aroused  the  citizen  body  of  many  of  our  states  to  marked  interest  in 
what  has  come  to  be  by  far  the  most  important  division  of  the  ex- 
pense side  of  their  state  budgets,  namely,  the  expenditures  made  for 
the  maintenance  of  charitable,  reformatory,  penal  and  educational 
institutions  now  managed  or  supported  by  their  state  governments. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  outlays  of  modem 
governments  for  the  care  of  defective  and  dependent  classes  were  in- 
significant. There  were  practically  no  expenditures  for  education. 
The  dominant  political  and  social  philosophy  declared  that  both  as  a 
matter  of  ethics  and  of  wise  public  policy  the  state  should  not  expend 
public  revenues  for  the  care  and  education  of  individuals  whom  pri- 
vate individuals  should  care  for  and  educate  ; and  the  general  prac- 
tice of  states  was  in  accord  with  this  dictum.  The  only  expenditures 
considered  justifiable  and  imperative  were  those  made  for  the  incar- 
ceration of  persons  convicted  of  crime.  Paupers,  feeble-minded,  and 
insane  were  kept,  it  is  true,  to  a greater  or  less  extent  in  public  alms- 
houses but  these  classes  were  cared  for  not  as  wards  to  whom  humane 
treatment  and  beneficent  conditions  should  at  least  be  guaranteed  but 
for  the  most  part  as  persons  dangerous  to  the  welfare  of  society,  from 
whom  if  society  was  protected  it  mattered  little  what  sort  of  a life 
or  what  the  fate  of  those  shut  within  the  restraining  walls  of  the  in- 
stitutions. The  doctrine  of  laissez  faire,  laissez  passer  thus  conceived 
and  narrowly  construed  led  to  frightful  results.  Men  and  women 


2 


were  permitted  to  live  in  conditions,  so  miserable  and  degrading  as 
nearly  to  pass  belief  in  these  days.  Not  only  was  the  public  conscience 
blunted,  human  sensibilities  were  brutalized. 

The  menace  to  social  welfare  which  the  results  of  that  individual- 
istic philosophy  and  practice  so  clearly  exhibited  forced  itself  on  pub- 
lic attention  and  brought  on  reaction  and  reform.  The  tales  of  Dick- 
ens and  Kingsley,  the  exposures  of  Shaf tsburyj  and  the  philippics 
of  Carlyle  produced  a revollition  in  English  philosophy  and  politics 
which  had  its  counterpart  later  in  this  country.  Thence  began  the 
growth  of  the  belief  that  it  is  not  only  advisable  but  necessary  that 
society  secure  by  positive  preventive  measures  as  well  as  by  negative 
restrictive  measures  protection  from  the  deteriorating  forces  of  ignor- 
ance, disease  and  degeneracy.  Public  opinion  soon  demanded  that  the 
states  should  provide  equal  opportunities  for  the  education  of  all 
classes  from  the  primary  grades  to  the  university  and  should  guaran- 
tee decent  conditions  and  humane  treatment  and  enforce  a reform- 
ative regimen  for  all  those  confined  within  its  institutions.  The 
effect  of  this  change  in  social  philosophy  in  the  middle  decades  of  the 
last  century  became  apparent  very  soon  in  the  budgets  of  our  states. 
The  expenditures  authorized  for  the  establishment  and  support  of 
educational,  charitable,  penal  and  reformatory  institutions  augmented 
rapidly  until  now  they  constitute  the  most  noteworthy  part  of  the  ex- 
pense accounts  of  the  states  of  the  American  commonwealth. 

It  is  with  the  growth  of  the  expenditures  for  our  various  state  in- 
stitutions in  Iowa  and  their  relation  to  the  general  budget  of  the 
state  that  I wish  to  deal.  Organized  as  a territory  in  1838  and  ad- 
mitted as  a state  in  1846,  Iowa’s  history  is  contemporaneous  with  the 
humanitiarian  movement  in  the  financial  operations  of  modern  states 
and  we  can  trace  the  pressure  of  tlie  altruistic  philosophv  of  our  day 
on  the  public  purse  in  this  state  under  unusually  normal  circumstances. 
Our  population  has  been  of  such  a character  from  the  beginning  as  to 
make  our  political  discussion  and  legislation  very  conservative.  So- 
cialism has  never  received  serious  support  from  any  considerable 
body  of  the  inhabitants.  Extravagance  in  expenditures  has  at  no 
time  characterized  the  state’s  financial  history.  Indeed  compared 
with  many  of  her  sister  states  Iowa’s  expenditures  in  many  respects 
have  been  parsimonious.  Nevertheless  the  past  fifty  years  have  seen 
a remarkable  increase  in  the  state’s  outlay  for  institutions— from  less 
than  10  per  cent  of  the  budget  of  the  biennium  of  1846-48  to  77  per 
cent  of  the  biennial  budget  of  1899-1901  in  which  the  expenditure  ag- 
gregated $4,578,648.74.  Since  1867  the  state  of  Iowa  has  disbursed 
more  than  50  per  cent,  of  its  income  for  institutions. 

In  presenting  the  subject  I shall  first  deal  with  the  development  of 
the  institutional  accounts  as  they  appear  in  the  specific  legislative 
appropriations  and  in  the  disbursements  of  the  Treasury.  The  var- 
ious sources  from  which  revenue  is  obtained  and  the  manner  of  raising 
the  same  to  meet  the  appropriations  will  next  receive  attention.  The 
methods  pursued  by  the  General  Assembly  in  making  the  appropria- 
tions in  the  biennial  budget  will  then  be  considered.  The  conclud- 


3 


ing  division  of  our  study  will  be  concerned  with  the  various  methods 
adapted  by  the  legislature  respecting  the  supervision  and  control  of 
the  expenditures  authorized  for  the  maintenance  of  the  several  in- 
stitutions. 

Institutional  appropriations  as  I shall  here  use  the  term  relate  to 
and  comprehend  all  appropriations  regularly  made  by  the  General  As- 
sembly for  an  object  or  work  in  and  of  itself  of  a permanent  char- 
acter; which,  however,  is  exclusive  of  and  not  incidental  to  the  work 
of  the  judicial  or  executive  or  legislative  branches  of  the  state  govern- 
ment. This  definition  extends  the  scope  of  our  inquiry  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  popular  conception  of  “ institutions.  ’ ’ Thus  there 
will  be  considered  appropriations  for  our  State  Library  and  State 
Historical  Society  as  well  as  those  made  for  Insane  Hospitals  or  for 
the  State  University.  For  convenience  I shall  take  the  classifications 
of  institutional  accounts  adopted  in  the  State  Treasurer’s  Report  for 
1897  (See  p 26.  See  also  Tables  222  and  224  of  Report  for  1899)  al- 
though it  may  be  contended  with  reason  that  the  inclusion  of  the 
“Militia”  therein  is  going  somewhat  beyond  our  definition. 

In  that  classification  thirty  Institutions  appear.  Under  “Educa- 
tional” are  included  the  State  University,  the  State  Normal  School, 
the  Teachers’  Institutes,  and  the  Iowa  State  College  of  Agriculture 
and  Mechanic  Arts,  and  the  Board  of  Educational  Examiners.  In  the 
following  pages  there  will' be  included  under  the  “Charitable”  Insti- 
tutions the  four  Insane  hospitals  at  Mt.  Pleasant,  Independence,  Cla- 
rinda  and  Cherokee,  the  Orphan’s  Home  at  Davenport,  the  Soldiers’ 
Home  at  Marshalltown,  the  College  for  the  Blind  at  Vinton,  the  In- 
dustrial Home  for  the  Blind  at  Knoxville,  the  Prisoners’  Aid  Associ- 
ation, the  Benedict  Home  at  Des  Moines,  the  School  for  the  Deaf 
and  Dumb  at  Council  Bluffs,  and  the  Institution  for  Feeble  Minded 
Children  at  Glenwood.  Under  “Reformatory”  are  classed  the  two 
Industrial  schools,  the  one  for  Boys  at  Eldora,  and  the  one  for  Girls 
at  Mitchellville ; and  under  “Penal”  the  Penitentiaries  at  Ft.  Madison 
and  Anamosa.  Ten  Institutions  are  grouped  under  the  head  of  “Mis- 
cellaneous, ” Farmers’  Institutes,  the  State  Agricultural  Society  and 
its  branches,  the  National  Guards,  the  Weather  and  Crop  Service,  the 
Geological  Survey,  the  State  Library,  the  State  Historical  Society, 
the  State  Historical  Collection  (henceforth  under  the  State  Library), 
and  the  State  Horticultural  Society.  Since  1898  all  the  Penal,  Re- 
forniatory  and  Charitable  institutions,  with  the  exception  of  the  Ben- 
edict Home  and  the  Prisoners’  Aid  Association,  have  been  under  the 
Board  of  Control  of  Iowa  Institutions. 

I. 

THE  GROWTH  OF  INSTITUTIONAL  ACCOUNTS  IN  THE  STATE  BUDGETS. 

The  first  appropriation  for  an  institution  in  Iowa  was  made  in  the 
Act  of  Congress,  approved  June  12,  1838,  giving  Iowa  a territorial 
government.  The  Act  sets  apart  the  sum  of  |5,000  for  “the  purchase 
of  a library,  to  be  kept  at  the  seat  of  government”  (Sec  18).  The 
first  territorial  legislature  at  its  session  in  1838-39  provided  for  the 


4 


organization  of  a Militia  the  expense  of  which  was  to  be  sustained  by 
the  Territorial  treasury  (See  \ct  approved  January  4,  1839,  Sec.  15). 

— the  amount  being  contingent  on  the  actual  organization  and  the 
members  enlisted.  The  first  specific  appropriation  to  be  made  for  an 
institution  in  the  general  meaning  of  the  term  was  that  authorized 
for  the  erection  of  a penitentiary  at  Fort  Madison.  Various  incidents 
connected  therewith  are  interesting  as  illustrative  of  the  happy-go-lucky 
fashion  that  prevailed  among  our  early  law-makers  in  the  use  of  pub- 
lic funds.  Governor  Robert  Lucas,  Iowa’s  first  governor,  in  his  first 
message  to  the  legislature  in  1838  urged  that  body  to  memorialize 
Congress  for  an  appropration  with  which  to  establish  a penetentiary. 

(See  message  H.J.  1838-39  p 11-13).  In  the  Organic  law  creating  the 
territory  Congress  had  given  |20,000  for  public  buildings  “at  the  seat  of 
government”  (Sec.  13)  and  later  had  appropriated  $30,000  for  “erect- 
ing public  buildings  in  the  territory  of  Iowa”  (See  Act  of  July  7,1838, 

Sec.  6).  The  legislature,  however,  ignored  the  governor’s  sug- 
gestion and  forthwith  authorized  the  erection  of  a peniten- 
tiary on  a scale  not  to  exceed  in  cost  $40,000.  (See  Laws  1838-39  p. 

389. ) With  an  excess  of  virtue  that  is  naive  the  act  expressly  forbids 
the  prospective  Superintendent  of  the  prison  to  “interfere”  with  the 
appropriation  for  “public  buildings”  just  noted.  For  some  unac- 
countable reason  Gov.  Lucas,  who  did  yeoman  service  in  blocking 
measures  exceeding  the  powers  of  the  territorial  legislature,  failed 
to  veto  this  act  which  authorized  an  outlay  of  double  ^the  amount 
granted  by  Congress.  With  like  assurance  the  Board  of  Directors 
adopted  plans  that  required  $55,000  to  complete  and  in  1843  we  find 
the  national  House  of  Representatives  considering  a memorial  from 
Iowa  praying  Congress  to  make  good  a deficiency  of  $15,000. 
(Report  of  Committee  37  Congress  3nd  Ses. , Vol.  IV.  No.  793.) 

The  practice  among  the  territories  of  anticipating  the  donations  of 
Congress  evidently  became  a serious  evil  for  we  find  it  expressly 
prohibited  in  the  Omnibus  appropriation  Act  in  1843  (See  Act  of 
May  18,  1843  Sec.  117. ) 

I am  not  able  to  give  the  amounts  annually  expended  during  the  ter- 
ritorial days  for  the  three  institutions  mentioned.  The  financial  re- 
ports of  the  territorial  oflicers  were  meager  and  are  confusing. 
Further,  the  bulk  of  the  territorial  expenses  was  not  a direct  burden 
on  the  people  of  the  territory  of  Iowa,  but  was  borne  by  the  national 
government.  The  terrritory  did  levy  a territorial  tax  the  proceeds 
of  which  were  used  in  meeting  various  necessities;  but  this  fact 
makes  it  still  more  difficult  to  determine  the  cost  of  the  institutions. 

No  expenditures  appear  to  have  been  made  for  the  state  library  except 
the  annual  salary  of  $310  allowed  the  librarian.  Up  to  January  17,  , 

1843,  $38,638  was  spent  for  the  Penitentiary.  In  1845  a legislative 
committee  reported  that  between  forty -four  and  forty-five  thousand 
dollars  had  been  paid  out  for  buildings;  but  the  money  seems  to 
have  been  nearly  wasted  as  the  committee  observes  that  “any 
prisoner  of  common  cunning  that  could  not  get  out  (escape)  ought 
to  be  whipped  out”  (Journ.  of  Council  1845  p 51). 


5 


In  presenting  institutional  appropriations  after  the  admission  of 
Iowa  to  statehood  when  the  whole  cost  fell  immediately  ujion  the  tax 
paying  citizens  of  the  state,  several  matters  should  be  kept  in  mind. 
During  the  first  seven  or  eight  fiscal  periods  we  continue  to  exper- 
ience more  or  less  difficulty  in  getting  at  the  real  expense  of  the 
institutions.  The  specific  legislative  appropriations  can  be  more 
easily  traced  than  in  the  territorial  days  but  the  reports  of  the  state’s 
financial  officers  do  not  always  enable  us  to  determine  the  actual  dis- 
bursements from  the  Treasury  pursuant  to  the  appropriations.  Thus 
the  Auditor  and  Treasurer  of  State  in  their  reports  were  accustomed 
to  bunch  under  some  one  head  as  “miscellaneous”  sundry  accounts 
among  which  may  be  included  various  disbursements  for  institutions 
which  prevents  separation  and  classification  of  accounts.  We  en- 
counter another  difficulty  in  the  date  of  termination  of  the  fiscal 
periods  which  varies  more  or  less  and  still  another  in  the  fact  that 
the  periods  covered  by  the  reports  of  heads  of  institutions  do  not  al- 
ways coincide  with  the  former,  thus  not  enabling  us  to  check  the 
one  by  the  other.  Another  fact  of  importance,  especially  in  the 
growth  of  the  budget  and  legislative  control,  is  the  custom  which 
has  become  fixed  in  the  practice  of  the  legislature  of  making  continu- 
ous or  “standing”  appropriations.  In  the  earlier  periods  each  and 
every  expenditure  of  the  state  was  specifically  provided  for  at  each 
regular  legislative  session  either  by  separate  appropriation  act  or  by 
specific  mention  in  a section  or  clause  of  the  Omnibus  appropriation. 
In  the  later  periods  the  legislature  got  into  the  habit  of  making 
standing  appropriations  that  continued  in  force  from  period  to  period 
without  re-enactment  at  each  session,  as  in  the  Code  provisions  for  the 
per  capita  allowances  to  certain  institutions  for  support.  Appropria- 
tions have  come  to  be  known  as  ordinary  or  “standing”  and  “extra- 
ordinary.” The  latter  are  of  course,  the  separate  or  additional 
amounts  appropriated  at  each  biennial  session  for  new  or  particular 
purposes.  Finally  an  appropriation  may  be  definite  or  contingent  as  to 
amount.  It  is  contingent  when  the  amount  payable  depends  upon 
certain  events  or  conditions,  as  upon  the  number  of  inmates  in  an 
. institution.  In  what  follows  relative  to  legislative  appropriations  I 
shall  deal  only  with  the  definite  appropriations  that  specify  the  ex- 
act amount  to  be  expended.  The  entire  or  exact  cost  of  the  institu- 
tions for  biennial  fiscal  periods  will  be  exhibited  by  the  aggregate 
sums  disbursed  from  the  treasury  as  shown  by  Auditor’s  warrants 
drawn  on  the  Treasury  to  meet  the  appropriations. 

A.  GROWTH  OF  EXTRAORDINARY  APPROPRIATIONS. 

The  first  General  Assembly  appropriated  for  only  two  institutions. 
For  the  State  Library  1150.00  was  authorized  to  be  expended  and  a 
bond  issue  of  $20,000  was  ordered  to  obtain  funds  for  the  peniten- 
tiary to  make  it  ‘ ‘ efficient.  ’ ’ In  1849  the  legislature  authorized  the 
issue  of  $6,000  more  in  bonds  to  complete  the  buildings  at  Fort  Mad- 
ison. Provision  was  also  made  for  three  normal  schools,  at  Andrews, 
Oskaloosa  and  Mt.  Pleasant,  $500.00  for  each  per  annum  being  appro- 


6 


priated  out  of  the  state  University  fund — which  consisted  of  the  pro- 
ceeds of  the  sales  of  lands  given  the  state  for  founding  such  an  insti- 
tution. The  third  Assembly  in  1851  made  the  first  appropriation 
($500)  for  the  purchase  of  hooks  for  the  Library  and  appropriated 
$11,000  for  the  penitentiary.  It  also  took  the  first  step  toward  the 
establishment  of  an  Insane  Hospital ; as  it  directed  that  the  ‘ ‘ Saline 
lands”  given  the  state  by  the  national  government  should  be  sold 
and  the  money  received  should  be  used  as  a “fund”  for  founding  and 
supporting  a “Lunatic  Asylum.”  Out  of  the  proceeds  there  was 
also  set  apart  $5,000,  the  same  to  be  used  by  the  Superintendent  of 
Public  Instruction  for  the  college  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons  at 
Keokuk. 

The  fourth  General  Assembly  in  1853  was  the  first  to  feel  the  pres- 
sure of  the  humanitarian  movement  that  had  for  its  object  the  pro- 
vision of  suitable  care  for  the  unfortunate  defectives  of  society.  An 
Act  was  passed  directing  the  establishment  of  an  Asylum  for  the 
Blind  at  Iowa  City  appropriating  for  the  support  of  the  inmates 
$35.00  per  quarter  and  $2,000  for  general  and  contingent  expenses. 
Governor  Stephen  Hempstead  and  James  W.  Grimes  strongly  urged  the 
erection  by  the  state  of  an  Asylum  for  the  Insane  and  the  Legislature 
in  1854  in  response  made  an  appronriation  of  $60,000.  — (Laws  4 G.A. 
ch  134. ) The  commission  appointed  by  the  Assembly  to  supervise  its 
construction  under  the  chairmanship  of  Gov.  Grimes  after  extended 
investigation  deliberately  went  beyond  the  appropriation  and  procured 
plans  for  an  institution  costing  at  least  $200,000  and  appealed  to  the 
legislature  to  sustain  their  action  both  on  the  grounds  of  economy 
and  of  humanity.  (Report  of  Insane  Commissioners  App.  H.  Journ. 
1856  pp  236-239. ) Their  recommendations  were  concurred  in  by  the 
Assembly  which  appropriated  $50,000,  $40, 000, $105, 000  and  $75,000  in 
the  next  four  sessions  to  construct  the  Asylum  in  accordance  with 
the  most  improved  plans  of  the  time.  Besides  making  provisions 
for  the  insane  the  fourth  Assembly  at  its  first  session  appropriated 
$10,000  for  an  institution  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb.  Prior  to  that  time 
the  state  had  begun  making  provision  for  the  education  of  the  Deaf, 
Dumb  and  Blind.  In  1849  $50.00  per  annum  was  appropriated  for  each 
person  certified  to  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction ; by 
the  Code  of  1851  the  amount  was  increased  to  $100.  The 
amount  was  expended  by  the  parent  or  guardian  of  the  person  entitled 
thereto.  The  first  act  also  apnropriated  $500  for  the  education  of  the 
deaf  and  dumb  and  $250  for  the  blind.  It  is  not  clear  from  the  act 
whether  the  latter  were  in  addition  to,  or  the  limit  of  the  allowance 
for  such  persons.  Besides  the  appropriations  already  noted  the  fourth 
General  Assembly  made  provision  of  $5,000  for  the  Geological  Sur- 
vey and  of  $2,000  for  the  State  Agricultural  Society. 

At  the  session  of  1856-57  there  was  appropriated  for  the  Blind 
Asylum  $3,500,  and  a per  capita  allowance  of  $25  per  quarter  for  each 
pupil.  The  state  Historical  Society  received  assistance  to  the  extent 
of  $600  for  the  biennium  and  thenceforward  became  a beneficiarv  of 
the  Treasury.  The  Normal  Schools  at  Andrew  and  Oskaloosa  again 


7 


received  appropriations,  this  time  of  |1,000  each,  instead  of  |600  as  in 
1849. 

The  appropriations  for  institutions  were  materially  increased  at 
the  session  of  1858,  the  first  Assembly  convened  under  the  new  state 
constitution.  Three  new  ones  appear  in  the  list.  Teachers  Institutes 
became  a state  charge,  the  sum  of  1100  being  allotted  for  each  county 
organizing  an  institute.  (7  G.  A.  ch  52,  sec  56. ) The  Agricultural  col- 
lege was  inaugurated  with  an  appropriation  of  $13,000.  The  State 
University  appears  formally  for  the  first  time.  It  had  had  an 
inchoate  existence  since  1846  but  for  various  reasons  it  had  not  be- 
come a Working  institution  until  1855.  The  appropriation  of  $5,000 
taken  from  the  Saline  land  sales  for  the  College  of  Physicians  and 
Surgeons  at  Keokuk  already  referred  to  may  be  said  to  have  been  the 
first  state  appropriation  for  the  University  as  the  institution  at  Keo- 
kuk was  brought  within  the  University’s  jurisdiction.  As  a matter  of 
fact  the  expenditures  for  the  old  state  capitol  at  Iowa  City  were  in 
effect  appropriations  for  the  University  as  it  was  turned  over  to  the 
Trustees  for  its  use  when  the  capital  was  removed  to  Des  Moines  in 
1858.  The  first  specific  appropriation  for  the  University  made  by  the 
seventh  Assembly  amounted  to  $13,000. 

From  1858  to  1868  the  grand  total  of  the  extraordinary  appropri- 
ations for  institutions  fell  off  although  in  some  cases  the  amounts  ap- 
propriated were  increased:  (See  Table  I).  There  were  no  new  in- 
stitutions created  during  that  time  or  given  aid.  The  appropriation 
for  the  Insane  Asylum  at  Mt.  Pleasant  decreased  from  $105,000  in 
1858  to  $10,000  in  1862  and  $12,000  in  1864.  In  1866  the  Argicultural 
College  at  Ames  was  given  $91,000.  In  1868,  however,  several  new 
institutions  were  created  and  appropriations  therefor  appeared  in  the 
budget.  The  Insane  Hospital  at  Independence  was  inaugurated  with 
an  appropriation  of  $125,000;  the  Industrial  School  for  Boys  at  Eldora 
received  $15,000;  the  school  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb,  transferred  to 
Council  Bluffs,  was  given  $127,000,  for  buildings ; the  Horticultural 
Society  received  its  first  appropriation,  $1,600;  and  the  Orphans  Home 
at  Davenport  became  a state  institution  and  received  $52,000. 

From  that  time  up  to  the  present  legislative  appropriations  contin- 
ue to  grow  in  numbers.  In  1874  the  construction  of  a new  Peniten- 
tiary at  Anamosa  was  authorized,  the  amount  appropriated  at  first  be- 
ing $24,500.  At  the  sesison  of  1876  an  institution  for  Feeble  Minded 
Children  and  the  Normal  School  at  Cedar  Falls  were  established.  The 
next  institution  to  be  founded  was  the  Insane  Hospital  at  Clarinda  in 
1884;  and  ten  years  later  the  legislature  authorized  the  establishment 
of  the  fourth  Hospital  for  the  Insane  at  Cherokee.  In  the  latter  in- 
stance the  Assembly  made  an  appropriation  of  $50,000  per  annum  for 
four  years.  In  1896  the  legislature  made  another  appropriation  for  a 
period  of  years  for  the  State  University  appropriating  the  proceeds 
of  a special  tax  levy  of  one  tenth  of  a mill  on  the  taxable  property  in 
the  counties,  the  amount,  however,  not  to  exceed  $55,000  per  annum, 
and  the  appropriation  or  levy  to  continue  for  five  years.  In  1898  the 
levy  was  extended  one  year  and  in  1900  the  levy  was  authorized 


8 


for  another  five  years.  The  Agricultural  College  in  1900  was  also 
given  a similar  appropriation  for  five  years. 

Unlike  some  of  the  eastern  states  Iowa  has  given  but  little  finan- 
cial assistance  to  institutions  founded  and  managed  solely  by  pri- 
vate parties  even  though  their  objects  be  general  or  public  in  char- 
acter. This  policy  is  the  result  in  great  part  no  doubt  of  a reaction 
from  the  excessive  use  of  local  credit  in  assisting  railroad  construc- 
tion in  the  early  history  of  the  state.  Be  this  as  it  may  the  finances 
of  the  state  have  been  remarkably  free  from  the  perplexing  problems 
which  state  aid  to  private  eleemosynary  and  educational  institutions 
has  engendered  in  the  older  eastern  states.  Some  aid  however  has 
been  given  institutions  managed  entirely  by  private  parties  usually 
acting  together  as  corporate  bodies.  Thus  the  Horticultural  and 
Argicultural  Societies  and  Fair  Associations  fall  within  this  class. 
In  1884  the  legislature  appropriated  |5,000  for  the  Benedict  Home  for 
fallen  women  located  at  Des  Moines  and  |2,000  for  the  Prisoners  Aid 
Association.  The  latter  appropriation  however  was  discontinued  after 
a few  years. 

All  of  the  extraordinary  appropriations  which  have  just  been 
briefly  sketched  are  given  in  detail  for  each  legislative  session  or 
period  in  Table  I to  which  the  reader  is  referred  for  particulars. 
For  purposes  of  comparison  the  appropriations  have  been  classified 
and  summarized  under  four  heads,  Educational,  Charitable,  Penal, 
and  Miscellaneous  in  Table  II.  In  the  latter  are  included  columns 
showing  not  only  the  total  institutional  appropriations  but  also  the 
grand  total  of  all  extraordinary  appropriations  made  by  the  General 
Assemblies  and  the  proportions  of  the  former  to  the  latter.  The 
appropriations  made  at  extra  sessions  are  not  separated  but  included 
within  those  of  the  first  session  of  an  Assembly.  It  should  be  con- 
stantly kept  in  mind  that  the  amounts  set  out  in  Tables  I and  II 
represent  merely  the’  extraordinary  appropriations  for  Iowa’s  insti- 
tutions and  not  the  total  cost.  They  show  the  sums  specially  appro- 
priated at  the  several  legislative  sessions.  The  bulk  of  the  appropri- 
ations, in  particular  of  those  for  the  institutions  under  the  Board  of 
Control  was  made  for  buildings,  repairs  and  improvements.  The 
per  capita  allowances  for  support  are  contingent  and  in  the  main  are 
regular  standing  appropriations ; they  are  not  given  in  the  tables. 
The  total  exact  cost  of  the  institutions  as  shown  by  warrants  drawn 
on  the  State  Treasurer  is  exhibited  later  in  Tables  III  and  IV.  Some 
facts  relative  to  the  appropriations  may  be  pointed  out  before  passing 
on  to  the  actual  cost  for  institutions  as  shown  by  the  warrants  drawn 
on  the  state  treasury. 

The  largest  single  appropriation  made  for  an  institution  was 
$360,000  for  the  Insane  Hospital  at  Cherokee  in  1900-01.  The  smallest 
total  of  institutional  appropriations  was  in  1848-49  and  amounted  to 
only  $1,900.  The  largest  total  occurs  in  the  budget  of  1900-01,  it 
reaches  $1,117,419.  The  totals  for  educational  institutions  as  exhib- 
ited in  Table  II  shows  increases  that  start  from  $1,600  in  1848-49  up 
to  $297,000  exclusive  of  the  special  tax  levies  for  the  University  and 


TABLE  I-SPEOIPIO  EXTRAORDINARY  APPROPRIATIONS  MADE  BY  THE  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY  OF  IOWA  FOR  THE  STATE  INSTITUTIONS,  1846-1901. 


Ednoational— 

State  University 

State  Normal  Soliool 

TeaoherH’  Institutes 

Agrionltural  OoIloKe 

Ohari  table — 

Hospital  at  Mt.  Pleasant 

Hospital  at  liulopondenoe 

Hospital  at  Olarinda 

Hosintal  at  Oherokee 

Orplians’  Homo  

Soldiers’  Home 

OolloKo  for  Blind 

Industrial  Home  for  Blind 

Beuodiot  Home 

Prisoners’  Aid  Association 

Soliool  for  Deaf  and  Dumb. . , 
Institution  for  Feeble  Minded. 
Reformatory — 

Industrial  School— Girls 

Industrial  School — Boys 

Penal— 

Anamosa  Penitentiary 

Ft.  Madison  Pouitentiary 

Misoellauoous — 

Anrioultural  Society 

National  Guards 

Fish  Oomniission 

Weather  Service 

GooloRioal  Survey  

State  Library  

State  Historical  Society 

State  Historical  Oollootiou . . . 
State  Horticultural  Society 


Total 3(1460  I 


1848 

2d  GA 

1860 

3cl  GA 

1852 
4th  GA 

1864 
6th  GA 

1866 

6 th  GA 

1858  1 1860  1 1862  I 1864 

7th  GA  8th  GAigth  GA  lOthGA 

1 1 1 

1866 
nth  GA 

1868 
12th  GA 

1870 
13th  GA 

1872 

14th  GA 

1874 
16th  GA 

1876 

16th  GA 

1878 
17th  GA 

1880 
18th  GA 

1882 

19th  GA 

1884 

20th  GA 

1886  1888 
2l8t  GA  22d  GA 

1 

1890 
33d  GA 

1893 

34th  GA 

1894 

26th  GA 

1896 

36th  GA 

1898 

j27thGA 

1900 

28  GA 

$ 

$13000 

$5000 

$ 

$20000 

$21000 

$20000 

$26000 

$62300 

$46000 

$47467 

$60000 

$ .. 

$60000 

$64600 

163000 

162000 

1126000 

$78000 

$66000 

$31000 

$11000 

$10000 

1600 

2000 

3000 

14600 

13600 

17700 

49600 

27800 

26200 

39300 

17600 

23700 

60000 

48000 

14000 

170000 

13000 

20000 

91000 

47760 

68600 

38600 

34000 

24820 

8973 

13000 

23000 

32100 

6300 

7000 

60000 

63600 

49000 

64600 

6000 

117000 

100000 

40000 

106300 

76000 

10000 

12000 

27160 

28460 

36600 

21900 

8760 

30100 

19800 

17000 

16700 

142000 

106000 

66000 

87100 

20600 

24000 

49100 

10600 

76600 

126000 

166000 

200000 

96900 

104000 

60000 

36300 

81260 

66880 

6(>000 

28760 

20000 

16760 

60000 

19300 

14876 

19300 

160000 

103000 

102000 

180400 

66100 

137038 

199300 

34806 

23300 

212000 

112140 

100000 

360000 

62000 

26000 

19700 

8200 

4360 

6426 

26000 

16200 

67200 

8960 

31836 

46000 

13000 

14600 

18800 

6800 

44600 

60000 

100000 

12260 

38260 

16632 

llj876 

618  lO 

lOUOO 

31000 

2000 

3600 

16000 

10000 

13000 

6000 

11000 

eoioo 

27016 

73600 

46000 

12000 

2600 

3000 

12800 

10200 

10200 

17034 

8000 

7t)00 

6100 

l<>5(j0 

7000 

6500 

2000 

40UO0 

30300 

22100 

18000 

19000 

2246 

6000 

2000 

4000 

6000 

8000 

9000 

9200 

6000 

lOOOO 

2000 

1600 

10000 

14000 

9000 

14500 

3000 

127000 

47000 

16000 

16000 

60000 

44418 

61896 

17000 

60100 

4460 

17800 

26(169 

16000 

14100 

17100 

9600 

6000 

6200 

14100 

14216 

61000 

69300 

31200 

44000 

416)0 

266(10 

49860 

178700 

9000 

64534 

21600 

6800 

24938 

10360 

17260 

18136 

7160 

6000 

17000 

3900 

21760 

16000 

■ 16000 

30000 

26000 

48166 

2600 

16962 

4050 

24190 

9000 

21860 

2U8U0 

26900 

6060 

18600 

4800 

37960 

24693 

22600 

63024 

43066 

64600 

76100 

31400 

23400 

38860 

19300 

37666 

66903 

42826 

69240 

6000 

11000 

6606 

20000 

46180 

101790 

13116 

28082 

40000 

20719 

9600 

7300 

31800 

18860 

36060 

16190 

13076 

10700 

10600 

9700 

16960 

9600 

64300 

7700 

14400 

2000 

4000 

4000 

60000 

30000 

7000 

6000 

3000 

8760 

6000 

6000 

6000 

6600 

2000 

3000 

9000 

16000 

3000 

6000 

6000 

10000 

6000 

18000 

18666 

400 

926 

400 

3000 

6000 

6000 

1700 

1000 

6000 

6000 

3000 

600 

1000 

6000 

1000 

4000 

1000 

3000 

26000 

30000 

26000 

1600 

2000 

2600 

7900 

11936  1 8606 

1 117000 

94400  1 208480 

1 3U7290 

1 69116 

1 68083 

140160 

626900 

1 449726 

463600 

312743 

387642 

296189 

299377 

402990 

1 937483 

679260 

487671 

729476  1 

429183 

769870  1 

1006042 

369866 

1117419 

NOTE — The  Appropriations  in  1848,  1866  and  1868  opposite  State  Normal  were  for  the  Normal  Schools  at  Andrews,  Mt.  Pleasant  and  Oskaloosa. 
N.  B.— Continuous  or  "Standing”  approiiriations  for  support  and  speoial  tax  levies  are  not  included  above. 


9 


the  Agricultural  College  which  are  ccntingent  with  a maximum  lim- 
it. The  appropriations  for  the  charitable  institutions  have  increased 
from  $2,000  in  1852-53  to  $683,940  in  1896-97 ; those  for  the  penal  and 
reformatory  institutions  have  mounted  up  from  $20,000  in  1846-47  to 
$166,602  in  1896*97.  The  major  portion  of  these  appropriations  was 
authorized  for  buildings,  repairs  and  improvements. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  showings  in  Table  II  is  to  be  found  in 
the  columns  under  the  heading  “Proportions”  in  which  are  given  the 
per  centages  or  proportions  of  the  appropriations  for  state  institu- 
tions of  the  grand  total  of  appropriations  for  all  purposes 
whatsoever  and  the  proportion  made  for  the  other  or  general 
expenses  of  the  state  government.  In  the  first  legislative  per- 
iod— 1846-47 — the  appropriations  for  institutions  constituted  57. 1 
per  cent  of  the  entire  amount  appropriated.  In  the  next  period 
however,  they  amounted  to  12.4  per  cent.  Since  then  while  there 
have  been  marked  fluctuations,  the  appropriations  for  institutions 
have  taken  the  lion’s  share  in  the  biennial  budgets.  The  pro- 
portion in  1894-95  was  94. 1 per  cent.  In  other  words  there  was  appro- 
priated for  the  general  state  expenses  only  5.9  per  cent  of  the  grand 
total  of  extraordinary  appropriations  in  that  period.  In  actual  figures 
the  amounts  were  $769,870  for  the  institutions  and  $58,595  for  all  other 
purposes.  The  significance  of  such  figures  is  very  great.  They  tell 
us  with  emphasis  the  trend  of  social  and  political  thought. 


O00  00  00  00C»00  00  Q0  00  00  00  00  C0G0  00CX)000000000000000000 
O?0C0«D?0CD00  00  00  00  00'<I“Q“5“QI“30S05050i05CnCnOTOTOl 

O?0«lD?lD«D^00(XC0  00  00-^1~3“a-^— lOSOi^OSOlOtOTOiCnOitki^ 
l-‘':D<IOlCCt-‘';0'-aC7tCOH-*?£i~5Cr(05H-CD^Ol05l-‘:D-QOTCCt-^?C>“^ 


+ 


occco'-aosoi^^coto 


++ 


+ 


* » :(! 
to 

CO  to 
-:j  o CO 
Q O C7T 

o o o 
o o o 


05  Ol  «0  O GO  to  to  CO  OS  00  00  ?0  CD  Oi  o to  to  to 
^^^C^tOOOtO^(i-tOO~30SOOCO«3tOOOCl^DtO 
0050SC001>C>.  Cn-Q^t^-QOOOCTT-^OOCOOO 

oooooooo-<if-^ooocnoooooo 

OOOOOOOOtO-30000000000 


ool  I I I 

CD  to  1-^  CD  »-*■  CO 

OCJicncncDOTCDCo 


to  I 1 I I I 
CD  cn  to  1 CO  CO  to 

CDfpxtOOOH--tOOOCOO 


-a  CO  rfi>.  to  CD  to  OS  Ox  to  00  00 


CO  I CO 
O 00  ox 
O CO  o 


OS  to  OS  CTX  H-i  CO  rfs- OS  H-'  1-^  CO  CO  CO  1-^  H- 

to  00  CD  CO  CD  1-^  CO  CD -3  CO  O 00  CO  to  CD  to  ox  K-i. 

C0l-^C0-300C0t0C0l-^C0t00S05t0Ot0t000-<l0S:DCD~3Ot0 
OOSCDOS^^h^i^OSCOOSCDi-^COOSOOi-^CnOXH-^OOOxCOOxOO 
-3rfi.kfi.OxOOO-30000XK^>fxCnOxO>-*<OxOxOOOOOOO 
CDOOOxtOOi-^OOOOCOOOOOSOOOOOOOOO 


H-^istoosinM^tots 


to  OS  (Ox  to  to  OS -3  CO  1-^  li-  to  CD  to  Co ->3  to  (OX  O 
CD“3>;i-(OX(OXI-^(OtCDOStOOOCO~3CDOOrf^>t^COCOOX-30 


I I 


i I I i 

CO  ->3  to  (OX  ' 


OOCD^P^l-^“3(OX^-lOO^-‘tfi.OStOOS^-‘■CDtO^P>.OSOO^-^(Ox~3■ 


CO  (OX  OS  (0l  OS  00  “3  (OS  CO  00  O 00  CD  (Ox  CO  CO  (Ox  ■ to  !-*•  O rfi- to 

CO  00  OS  00  CD -3  to  ~3  1-^  ~3  to  05  CD  (Ox  (Ox  • 00  CO  (Ot  O 

C0t005t0t0^^^0^^^c0(0^(0xc0^^s^00(0s-30•  0l-‘~3i-*0 

to  O !--■  O -<I  O (OX  O OS  ~3  OS  CD  O O • 00  CD  00  O 

O Ox  to  (Ox  O (Ox  O O CO  O ~3  (OX  CO  O CD  O ■ to  (OX  o o o 


to 

05  H-*  05  O 

(05  o o o 
o o o o 
OS  o o o 


o‘^ 

P s 


u I I III  I 

1-^  OS  GO  H-i  to  to  1-1  (Ox  ~3  to  to  I (05  (-1  CO 

iO(OxOS(OltOl-^-3(OxOrf^(OxOOtOCOO<OT 


CD  I-*  (X)  >*5^  i 


00  to  to 

>JS>.  -3  CO  (Ox 


rfi.(OxO5t0  OS  h-^  h-^  h-^tO' 

►f^OtOOOSOSh^i-iOCDCTXrfi-^OOtOCOCOOOO- 
000000-30)-^000-30000S- 
OOOOOOOOOOC)O(0xOOOO- 

ooooooooooooooooo- 


CO  - cn  -3  • ^ 

O-  O O CD  O • CD 
O-  OOOO-  tOOlOX 
O-  OOOO-  (0x00 


I to 

(OX  OS  CO 
to  CO  O CO 


1-^  I to  I I CO 

tOCOCDrfi.(OX-3COtO 

-3(OX-3tOO(OX-3(OX 


1 I 


h-^  CO  O -3  ~3  (Ox  CD  to  to  (05  CO  rfiii.  (0(  tO  tO  ©9 

1-^  (Ox  O OS  to  to  (GO -3  CO  O CD  CD  GO  OS  4^  to  45^  OS  (Ox  O O CD  tO 

-3CDOSCDCDCD-3CD-3tOCDOS  "3t0C0CD(0xO(G0CD-.3  004^-3(G0l-^-3O 
hf^OOOOOt-*4i>-OSt04:^CDCOl—  <05-3(0x-3CDh-*.OH-t04i-4s^O<3SCDCD4^ 
I-*  OS  4^  -3  GO  -3  -3  -•!  GOCD-3004i>.4:^OtOO(OxOOi-‘CDGOOOOtOO(OX 
CD(OxtOOtOOXh-^OCOO-3CDtOCOO‘OxOOtO(OlOOOOOS(OxOO 


I I 1 1 xo^ 

CO -3  4i^  45^  CO  1-^  »3  to  to  CO  1-^  -3  O 

O4^OCDH-^CD(0l00C0C7Xl-‘C0C0t0C04i-0x05(0X 

(OXt0-3CO»-^OSO5-3t0l-‘  (0(CD4(^ 


i 


I I -I 


to  (OX  I 
CO  H--  (OX  to  t5  CD 
CD  CD  00  -3 


00  (Ox  45^  1-^  (OX  OS  OS 


i0CDO000S00i0x0S4i^CDC04s^-3(0x0x-3004i>^t0l-^0SC0t0K-^  m 

4s^tOCDtOOCD-3COh-iOOCDOO(Ox4^CD(OxOCD(OX(OS(-"OStO(OxtO-3(OxCO 

(0x0SC0G0C0t04^(0X(0xC0-3(0xOI-‘00C04- 3H^05CD(0xt0l-^OO(0X(0x 

i-^4i.CS4s-C04i^00O4S^4^(0xi-^-3-4^CD05i--i-‘4i-4^t0  00  -3  00OC0C0-3 
-^3>P^G005t0t0H-C0(0XCDOt04i^(0x00CD00O(05(-*C00000t0t0C000C0 
t0-3C0(0X-3l-^i0xC0CD(0xCD4i--30S4^4^0S0SH^-3  -3  00  05OOt04;^4i^ 


I 


II  I I I 

„ CO  CO  I to  I 

(Ox4^-30O(Ox00CDh-O; 


I OS  I 

05CD(0X^O50S4^(0x<Jt0(Ox 

i-^4i.i-^COCD4s-OSQOl-^OS4(^ 


COCOl-^COCOOS4i^tOCD 


CO  OS  OS  00  to  4i- 


to  to  -3  (Ox  CD 


9^ 

P *1 


P [o' 
o'  P 


^3* 

c 2 


9'^ 

® 05 


^ § 

P »’ 

0)  o 

- (D 

OO  ^ 


O hH 


SS-O 


9*^ 

P HJ 


HQ 

o 

^ P 
p p 

'~‘a> 


9^ 

P 2 


«3  00  to  to  CD  CO  OS -3  CO  OS  CO 


(Ox  4^  CO  <JS  CD  (GO  4^ 


H-iOS  tOh-^H^  CO(OxtOCO4^4i-tO4i^CO-3->3OS(0S4^(OxtO(Ox00(G04^ 
O(-‘0Si0X(G0  00(0x00  C0CD4i>-CD(G0t0t0O4:^H^C04i>-0S4^-30S-3C0-3t0 


COt04i^CDCDCOtOOOOOl 


4i<tO-<li4^^CD  (Ox<0S  -34s>-»-"tO0SCD 


HQ 
X a> 


CD(GO(GOOO(GOOO(GOGOOOOOGOOOOOOOOOGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO(X(XOO 
OCDCDCDCDCDOOOOQOOOOO-3-3-3^-30SOSOSOS(OS(OxOXOXOXOx4^4x 
O000S45^t0O(G00S4^t0O(G0  054^t0O00(JS4^t0OG00S>^t5O000S 
I I I I I ( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
OCDCDCDCDCD00  00(X(G0  00  -3  -3  “3-3-30S050S050S(0x(0x(0x(0x(0x4^4i^ 
h-CO-30^CO»-*CO«3(OX(Wl-*CO-'3(OlCOK--CD-3(OXCOh- CD-3(OXCOi-‘CD-3 


d 


d 

hO 


S 52! 
o H 


o 

00  CO 

4^ 

OS  ^ 
CD  2 

O d 

' H 
ffl 

Q 

d 

5^ 

d 

H 

O 

H 

d 


TABLE  II 


11 


B.  GROWTH  OF  EXPENDITURES 

We  have  so  far  considered  simply  the  growth  of  the  specific  extraord- 
inary appropriations  for  institutions  in  Iowa ; but  these  represent  only 
the  legislative  enactments  passed  at  the  biennial  sessions  of  the  Gener- 
al Assembly  which  authorize  disbursements  of  money  from  the  state 
treasury.  They  do  not  include  the  continuous,  or  standing  appropria- 
tions for  support  and  current  expenses  nor  any  of  the  contingent  ap- 
propriations for  the  institutions.  Further  the  entire  amount  of  an 
appropriation  may  not  be  expended.  To  determine  therefore  the  ac- 
tual cost  of  maintaining  the  institutions  and  the  exact  burden  sus- 
tained by  the  taxpayers  we  must  go  to  the  reports  of  the  state’s 
financial  officers.  We  have  now  to  turn  from  the  legislative  grants  to 
the  ordinary  or  current  operations  of  the  treasury  resulting  in  the 
fulfillment  of  the  statutory  provisions  for  the  institutions  of  the  state. 

The  growth  of  the  outlays  for  its  educational,  charitable,  penal, 
reformatory  and  various  other  institutions  in  Iowa  from  1846  to  June 
8,  1901  is  a shown  in  detail  in  Table  III.  With  the  exception  of  those 
for  1867  the  amounts  given  are  for  biennial  fiscal  periods  which  up  to 
1881  ended  on  or  about  October  31.  Since  l!‘83  June  30  has  been  the 
date  of  termination  of  the  fiscal  biennium.  During  the  first  ten  per- 
iods it  is  not  possible  to  make  an  accurate  exhibit  of  institutional  ex- 
penditures owing  to  the  inadequate  showings  of  the  financial  reports. 
The  table  is  reproduced  with  some  modification  from  Table  No.  224 
in  the  Report  of  the  Treasurer  of  State  for  1897-99  for  which  it  was 
prepared  under  the  direction  of  the  present  writer. 

In  general  the  outlays  show  a steady  increase.  For  the  education- 
al institutions  we  have  the  amounts  increasing  from  $21,116  for  the 
the  State  University  in  1863-65  to  $384,359  in  1899-1901;  the  expendi- 
tures for  the  Teachers  Institutes  have  not  increased  much — in  1873  76, 
their  cost  was  $10,250  and  in  1899-1901,  it  was  $1^',1' 0 ; for  the  State 
Normal  School  the  amounts  have  gone  up  from  $10,600  in  1875-77  to 
$167,606  in  1899-1901 ; and  for  the  Agricultural  College  the  expenditures 
have  mounted  up  from  $9,452  in  1857-59  to  $161,014  in  the  period  of 
1899-1901. 

The  class  of  institutions  which  has  absorbed  the  bulk  of  the  rev- 
enues expended  for  such  purposes  in  Iowa  is  the  charitable  and  of 
these  the  Hospitals  for  the  Insane  have  taken  much  the  larger  share. 
The  cost  of  maintaining  the  Hospital  at  Mt.  Pleasant  has  fluctuated, 
increasing  from  $27,070  in  1854-56  to  $107,880  in  1857-58,  then  decreas- 
ing to  $77,729  in  1861-63,  then  gradually  mounting  up  for  eight  years 
when  it  reached  $234,218.  During  the  next  ten  years  the  expenditures 
declined  with  tPe  exception  of  one  period.  Since  1883-85  the  outlay 
for  the  Hospital  at  Mt.  Pleasant  has  exceeded  $300, OuO  except  in  1897-99 
when  it  fell  to  $279,524,  The  initial  expenditures  in  1867-69  for  the 
Insane  Hospital  at  Independence  aggregated  $229,315.  Between  that 
period  and  1883  the  average  amount  expended  per  period  was  somewhat 
less;  but  since  1883-85  with  the  exception  of  two  periods  the  expendi- 
tures for  Independence  have  been  over  $300,000  each  period.  For  the 


12 


Hospital  at  Clarinda  the  expenses  increased  from  $81,876  in  1888-86  to 
$316,074  in  1891-98.  In  1895-97  they  amounted  to  $431,711, — the  largest 
amount  ever  disbursed  in  a fiscal  period  by  the  state  for  any  one  insti- 
tution. For  the  last  period  1899-1901  the  outlay  was  only  $286,181. 
The  Hospital  at  Cherokee  now  in  the  process  of  construction  received 
$137,603  in  1895-97  and  $263,541  in  1897-99.  On  account  of  various  de- 
lays the  Hospital  has  not  been  completed  and  the  expense  during  the 
last  period  was  only  $32,556. 

The  expenditures  for  the  Blind  and  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  began  as 
early  as  1848-50  but  prior  to  1855-56  the  Auditor  of  State  issued  his 
warrants  on  these  accounts  to  private  parties  who  expended  the 
amount  allowed  for  the  unfortunates.  The  largest  amount  expended 
for  the  College  for  the  Blind  was  $119,122  in  1871-73.  Since,  the  bien- 
nial average  has  been  about  $65,000  for  that  institution. 

In  1887-89  the  Industrial  School  for  the  Blind  at  Knoxville  appears 
in  the  Institutional  accounts,  the  outlay  that  period  was  only  $768, 
but  in  1891-93  $51,839  was  expended  for  it.  Thereafter  the  outlays 
were  50  per  cent.  less.  In  1900  the  legislature  voted  to  close  the 
institution  because  of  the  small  attendance. 

The  outlays  for  the  school  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  have  been 
larger  than  for  the  Blind.  Prior  to  1867  they  did  not  exceed  $25,000. 
From  1867  to  1881  the  average  was  about  $90,000  per  period.  The 
largest  amount  expended  for  the  school  was  $187,232  in  1883-1885. 
For  1899-1901  the  disbursements  from  the  State  Treasury  amounted  to 
$106,827. 

The  Institution  for  the  Feeble  Minded  at  Glenwood  has  come  to 
be  one  of  the  largest  institutions  of  the  state  the  expenditures  for 
which  nearly  equal  those  for  any  one  of  the  large  Insane  Hospitals. 
Beginning  in  1875-77  with  $12,293  its  cost  steadily  increased  up  to 
$163,059  in  1883-5 ; then  for  two  periods  decreasing,  then  increasing 
to  $329,393  in  1895-97.  During  the  last  two  years  ending  June  30 
$310,390  were  expended  for  the  institution  at  Glenwood,  a greater 
amount  than  was  expended  for  the  Hospital  at  Clarinda  in  the  same 
period. 

Expenditures  for  the  Soldiers’  Orphans’  Home  at  Davenport  ap- 
pear first  in  the  period  of  1865-67.  The  amount  s^ient  was  $104,360. 
The  maximum  amount  $228,380  was  expended  in  1869-71.  From  1875 
to  1889  the  state  paid  out  less  than  $100,000  per  period  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  Home.  Since  1884  its  cost  has  exceeded  that 
amount, reaching  $155,320  in  1899-1901.  Since  the  period  of  1885-7 
when  it  was  founded  the  Soldiers  Home  at  Marshalltown  has  cost 
more  than  $100,000  for  each  period  and  in  1895-97  and  in  1899-1901  it 
e.xceeded  $200,000. 

Because  some  of  the  appropriations  for  the  Industrial  School  for 
Girls  at  Mitchellville  were  not  made  separate  from  those  for  the  Boys 
School  at  Eldora  in  the  earlier  history  of  the  former  the  expenditures 
for  the  Reformatory  institutions  can  not  be  given  sej).:irately  for 
most  of  the  fiscal  periods  and  the  amounts  in  Table  III  are  the  total 
outlays  for  both.  Up  to  1883  their  cost  was  less  than  $100,000.  The 


TABLE  III— EXPENDITURES  FOR  INSTITUTIONS,  BY  THE  STATE  OP  IOWA,  AS  SHOWN  BY  AUDITOR’S  WARRANTS  DRAWN  ON  THE  STATE  TREASURY— 1846-1901. 


Institutions 

1846-48 

1848-60 

1860-62 

1862-64 

1864-66 

1867 

1867-69 

1869-61 

1861-63 

1863-66 

1866-67 

1867-69 

1869-71 

1871-73 

1873-76 

1876-77 

1 1877-79 

1879-81 

1881-83 

1883-86 

1886-87 

1887-89 

1889-91 

1891-93 

1893-96 

1896-97 

1897-99 

1899-01 

I 

1 

1 

$ 

S 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1 

$ 

121116 

$22062 

110019 

137071 

$65866 

$41744 

$37360 

$64993 

$41622 

$86799 

$114791 

$101270 

186933 

1161837 

1161304 

1159168 

$167949  ' 

$234486 

$384359 

10600 

12611 

18962 

48766 

24690 

29366 

43637 

89689 

61886 

71287 

100147 

9900 

89085 

167606 

1799 

3400 

4860 

6260 

6060 

6660 

8600 

8160 

10260 

9960 

9860 

9900 

6660 

9700 

10460 

9360 

10660 

10900 

8650 

10800 

10100 

9462 

7566 

6142 

23848 

83932 

63923 

72989 

44633 

31070 

26733 

6831 

16690 

18878 

46968 

22927 

17403 

89458 

80948 

88771 

90636 

04732 

161014 

237 

273 

242 

147 

297 

297 

111 

384 

297 

633 

1306 

616 

236 

1083 

847 

964 

1063 

1661 

2368 

Ohari  table— 

27070 

100338 

107880 

82376 

77729 

113062 

128971 

183696 

234218 

227328 

218163 

264666 

218467 

184046 

184167 

322908 

311844 

816943 

307731 

813658 

802660 

382523 

270624 

338774 

229316 

361946 

222938 

187248 

207854 

191846 

177463 

216991 

806906 

302269 

302186 

276996 

287864 

389767 

878868 

812046 

840289 

81876 

166688 

140977 

309840 

316074 

288688 

481711 

187608 

801916 

268641 

286181 

82566 

1144 

OrniiitiiH*  Hoin6  

104360 

62000 

228380 

168336 

114072 

69329 

39976 

66119 

62017 

99564 

71811 

93889 

109991 

118664 

108908 

180303 

106892 

166820 

SoldiorH*  Moino 

25828 

128679 

131694 

119649 

144656 

228718 

166688 

247606 

rinllopn  fnr  

160 

1360 

4880 

10970 

7222 

30387 

24622 

16600 

24073 

31604 

71301 

80233 

119122 

98458 

63147 

61146 

44918 

66902 

67027 

65363 

66160 

66789 

67686 

77666 

76676 

66600 

62723 

ItiduHtTifil  Homo  for  Rliiid 

768 

13302 

61039 

30084 

31882 

26786 

8876 

Bi^iiodiot  Homo 

3000 

3660 

2700 

6884. 

7222 

6088 

7878 

7267 

6688 

PriHonorH*  Aid  Anflooiatioii. . . . 

1063 

1000 

260 

46 

Hohool  for  Doaf  and  Dumb. . . 

600 

I960 

2400 

10800 

7000 

16000 

16000 

16600 

22146 

22100 

98018 

129824 

79609 

88419 

99241 

93177 

91886 

112763 

187232 

108332 

182423 

144493 

142117 

180466 

142414 

116246 

106827 

IuHtltutlo7i  for  Feeble  Minded. 

12293 

40490 

64186 

120970 

163069 

124800 

162108 

187266 

202801 

319630 

329393 

287904 

810390 

Reformatory — 

Reform  Schools 

20233 

23346 

73163 

66674 

92886 

60020 

66467 

66851 

116248 

118194 

124884 

133714 

146906 

143166 

176222 

167062 

179799 

Penal— 

AuamoHa  Ponitontiary 

60876  . 

47310 

71997 

103888 

124480 

111739 

166776 

170947 

187994 

111996 

166260 

217884 

288364 

268614 

246114 

Ft.  Madison  Penitentiary 

660 

1033 

10000 

9213 

19263 

26726 

46661 

78369 

36094 

63299 

30946 

70217 

64229 

41824  ' 

62866 

118366 

78083 

70640 

71963 

72186 

69103 

64007 

70636 

69117 

80678 

129137 

127626 

191312 

Misoollaneous — 

Fanners'  Institutes 

1677 

4106 

4678 

6689 

6261 

A jrrimi  1 turn  1 Hf>nioty.  

300 

3024 

6149 

4966 

14942 

18066 

11747 

12811 

14066 

19704 

29446 

34766 

34310 

33410 

82314 

35888 

347.‘'6 

37913 

88042 

38488 

48279 

47439 

42699 

48932 

44610 

34864 

National  Guards 

1419 

6791 

18220 

44402 

62965 

74286 

68122 

79602 

92922 

71187 

96844 

79836 

116806 

Fish  Com  mission 

3899 

8462 

7622 

1761 

6259 

7779 

8866 

7287 

4929 

8481 

4713 

7267 

9676 

8811 

6766 

Weather  Horvioe 

1974 

1287 

2071 

2462 

1918 

8636 

6241 

6716 

6383 

6826 

6376 

Geological  Survey  

6003 

9964 

18064 

2417 

10000 

12818 

19123 

6631 

20887 

18681 

17933 

17813 

State  Library  

1170 

447 

262 

300 

160 

700 

60 

3124 

26 

3613 

1000 

4786 

1000 

4300 

4160 

6377 

8020 

18163 

10638 

ii9il 

12833 

18325 

16880 

19719 

19967 

26980 

State  Historical  Society 

7000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1600 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

3000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

State  Ilistiorioal  Oolleotion 

1.362 

8389 

14982 

10909 

46906 

23619 

State  Horticultural  Society 

1000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

4260 

6000 

2600 

6000 

6000 

6000 

7600 

3600 

6426 

N.  B.— Tho  bionninl  poriods  vary  as  to  date  of  termination:  That  for  1846-48  closes  November  30,  the  periods  from  1848  to  I N.  B.— In  order  to  have  the  total  cost  of  the  Institutions  of  Iowa  the  expense  of  the  Board  of  Control  of  State  Institutions 
1881  end  on  dates  raiiKiiiK  from  Ootol'or  31  to  November  6,  without  any  apparent  reason;  the  period  of  1881-83  begins  December  1,  should  be  added  to  the  expenditures  for  the  Charitable,  Reformatory  and  Penal  Institutions  set  out  above  for  the  periods  of  1897- 
1881,  and  ends  Juno  30,  1883;  from  1883  down  tho  biennial  periods  all  end  on  June  30.  | 1899  and  1899-1901 ; for  the  former  the  amount  was  124,678.80  and  for  tho  latter  148,031.69. 


13 


argest  amount  $179,799,  was  expended  during  the  last  period 
of  1899-1901.  Prior  to  1871  there  was  but  one  penitentiary  the  ex- 
penses of  which  did  not  exceed  $30,000  for  any  period.  The  expen- 
ditures for  the  penitentiary,  at  Anamosa  have  always  been  greater 
than  those  for  the  penitentiary  at  Ft.  Madison  since  1877-79  for  the 
reason  that  the  latter  received  a largo  amount  of  revenue  from  the 
sale  of  the  labor  of  the  convicts.  The  largest  amount  expended  for 
the  institution  at  Anamosa  was  $288,364  in  1895-97  and  for  the  one 
at  Ft.  Madison  $191,312  in  1899-1901. 

The  significance  of  the  growth  of  institutional  expenditures  in  the 
state  budgets  of  Iowa  can  be  most  readily  appreciated  if  we  study 
the  total  expenditures  for  the  various  classes  of  institutions  and  com- 
pare with  the  state’s  outlays  for  other  purposes.  In  Table  IV  is  given 
a summary  of  such  expenditures  since  1846  together  with  the  per 
cent,  of  increase  or  decrease  from  period  to  period  and  the  per  cent- 
age  or  proportion  which  the  total  institutional  expenditures  consti- 
tute of  the  entire  expenses  of  the  state  and  what  proportion  of  the 
whole  general  expenses  of  the  state  make. 

Prior  to.  1858  the  state  paid  out  nothing  for  educational  institu- 
tions. In  1858-59  $11,251  was  expended.  The  outlflys,  however,  did 
not  exceed  $125,000  for  educational  purposes  until  the  period  of  1881- 
83.  During  the  eighties  such  expenditures  averaged  about  $165,000 
and  during  the  nineties  ihe  average  was  over  $300,000  for  each  period. 
A marked  increase  in  such  expenditures  took  place  during  the  last 
biennial  period,  the  amount  for  18^9-1901  being  $726,448,  an  increase 
of  81.4  per  cent,  over  the  preceeding  period. 

From  $650  in  1843-50  the  cost  of  Iowa’s  charitable  institutions  in- 
creased to  $154,267  in  1858-59.  The  amount  then  fluctuated  somewhat 
up  to  1867  when  it  increased  to  $633,230  for  the  ensuing  period.  The 
expenditures  thereafter  remained  about  $600,000,  In  1883-5  they 
amounted  to  $1,241,550.  The  maximum  expenditure,  $2,269,119  was 
made  in  1895  -97.  There  has  been  a decrease  since,  the  outlay  the 
past  two  years  being  $1,896,081.  Of  these  amounts  the  Insane  Hos- 
pitals have  taken  the  larger  portion.  Thus  in  the  period  of  1867-69 
the  Hospitals  cost  $411,910  and  the  other  charitable  institutions 
$221,319  and  in  1895-97  they  cost  respectively  $1,332,462  and  $936,657. 

The  expenditures  for  penal  institutions  in  which  the  reformatory 
are  included  in  the  summary  (Table  IV)  have  increased  at  about 
the  same  rate  as  those  already  noted.  Before  1871  the  total  for  any 
one  period  did  not  exceed  $100,000.  From  1871  to  1883  the  average 
outlay  was  $225,000.  Since  then  it  has  been  over  $400,000.  During 
1899-1901  the  maximum  was  reached,  $616,226. 

The  total  outlays  for  all  institutions  in  Iowa  has  increased  from 
$930  in  1846-48  to  $3,530,839  in  1899-1901.  They  did  not  go  above 
$100,000  until  after  1857  ; nor  above  $500,000  until  after  1867.  From 
1869  to  1883  they  remained  about  $l,000,t00.  Since  1895-97  the  total 
expenditures  have  been  above  $3,000,000. 

The  significance  of  these  increases  becomes  apparent  when  we 
compare  them  with  the  other  outlays  in  the  state’s  budget.  Do  the 


expenditures  for  the  educational,  charitable,  reformatory  and  penal 
institutions  constitute  a greater  or  less  proportion  of  the  expenses  of 
the  commonwealth  today  than  they  did  twenty  five  and  fifty  years 
ago?  The  showings  of  Table  IV  are  most  interesting  and  instructive. 
Before  1857  the  institutional  expenses  increased  from  3.4  per  cent  of 
all  to  31.9  per  cent.  During  the  next  ten  years  they  averaged  about 
45  per  cent  of  all  state  outlays  and  about  55  per  cent  from  1869  to  1883. 
From  the  latter  year  up  to  the  present  the  proportion  remained  above  60 
per  cent  and  since  1893  it  has  been  above  70  per  cent.  In  other  words  the 
people  of  Iowa  spend  over  70  per  cent  of  their  state  revenues  for  the 
maintenance  of  their  state  institutions  and  less  than  30  per  cent  for 
all  other  state  expenses.  In  1899-01  the  institutions  absorbed  77. 1 
per  cent,  and  general  state  expenses  required  but  23.9  per  cent.  The 
actual  expenditures  were  $3,530,089  for  institutions  and  $1,048,259  for 
the  judicial,  legislative  and  executive  branches  and  the  incidental 
expenses  of  the  state. 


TABLE  IV— SUMMARY  OF  EXPENDITURES  FOR  INSTITUTIONS  AND  GRAND  TOTAL  FOR  ALL  STATE 

PURPOSES  WITH  PER  CENT  OF  INCREASE,  1846-1901. 


Fiscal 

Period 

1846-48 

1848-60 

1850-52 

1852-54 

1854-66 

, 1857 

1857-69 

1859-61 

1861-63 

1863  65 

1865-67 

1867-69 

1869-71 

1871  73 

1873-75 

1875-77 

1877-79 

1879-81 

1881-83 

1883-85 

1885-87 

1887-89 

1889-91 

1891-93 

1893-95 

1895-97 

1897-99 

1899-01 

Proportions 

Insti  Geu. 

tution  Exp. 

iO  C<t  CO C- C- 1C  <35  — 1 T-I  Tti  «0  W CO  00  t-H  00  IC  05 -rf  0> 

£-t'£-^00  05rf'O0000C0iC05Ttl}>05  05£-lClOt>*r-l00':005«C>?00l 
05  05QOCX3:C!'<#lCiy3:OiOiCTi^CO'^Tt<T}<TtiTHTllCOCOCO<OiCO(M(M(M(M 

-rtl  OO  £-  05  CO  05  CO  ic  ^ 05  CO  05  ^*1  00  C-  CQ  ?D  05  (M  lO  tH  iX> 

CQWC000rHOiC05'rH  '«^O«0(MOO03iO-^0i00THC0T-lC0C0C- 

■rHT-iCOlOTliCOCO'^'>tilOCC>l01ClC10iOlCCO?0«DC'?Dt-E'i>’t- 

Per 

Cent 

■ CQ  CQ  05  £-  lO  OQ  05  00  1C  CO  00  Ttl  T-l  lo  1:0  05  Oi  N 05  CO  i>  00  lO  tH  rH 

';D050^?0^0005(?iOTtiCOO-rHTHTHi>.i:D«DCOJ>CO(M050t- 

O5eO|OT(Mt-^T|l(0i'^?C'CQ  |THr-l|i-HCO|  1 (Mj(MTH 

Grand 

Total 

138746 

76017 

105834 

105799 

245344 

310746 

535068 

590528 

526186 

680373 

969648 

1554ni4 

1939857 

2005900 

2003220 

2233797 

1973837 

1950313 

2286738 

3139813 

2921612 

2825004 

3044036 

3768424 

3677047 

4748264 

4272394 

4678548 

Per 

Cent 

■ 

05  «C>  00  0?  r- »C  1C  1C  05  05  t- 0?  Tj!  Til  rH  (M  Tt  i;0  CO 

•05iCTti'^05C-lC00  05C;»lC05TliOCQOC^W005«C>-rHiCTHCQ05(M' 
•<MTllTllO5O51C|(?iiiXl':O00CO|THrHrH'  <M:D|  1-lrH  CO  tH 

• T-H  1C  (M  1 1 II 

Total 

Instit’n 

$930 
2130 
13762 
19826 
78244 
156367 
245875 
231845 
165662 
279956 
454981 
843937 
1180450 
1122321 
1001550 
- 1125024 
1008070 
1026702 
1258412 
2017421 
1826714 

1947456 

2169039 

2495244 

2612707 

3467242 

3131041 

3530089 

-1^ 

d 

Ph  j I 

•OOCO  Tt^  «0  ic  tH  00  «0  tH  7-h  Tt<  00  (M  IC  05  IC  tH  cO  tJ<  (M  OO  Tt< 

•OC000lC00C0d502i;0->-lTj<lC00TtlO00  00-rHC0?C>C0«0t-'i-lTHC<*05 
i-IOTjHOiCOTfICOlCitOOi-.-lTHrH  IrHO?  tHi-HtH 

; O..  TH  1 1 , 1 

Miscel- 

laneous 

OC-(?Q'^03-rH^TMt-lCT-iC00005«0-rH00  00  C0J>t-00(0?t-C0?0C0C0 
t-'-fi:D0i»C00OC0TtlC000(M«C>tH0505C3C0TtirH^->-l05C005i-HTj<C0 

I C0'^TtlC0i-HOt-lCt-05OlClC(?CiO>C!C£-I>CQC<i00O05i>CQ(0iC0 
COOlCeOOi-HK5TH05050100i0005«OTt^05THC^lCOOlC'rH 
t-h  rH  CO  CQ  rH  rH  05  CO  T^t  Tj<  Tfl  IC  ic  t- 05  05  CO  03  1C  05  05 -r-l  tH  05 

tH  iH  tH  iH  iH  tH  05  05  03 

Per 

Cent 

•lCi>'tH05  001CC5  05  05  05CO  ICOO  05iH05  ?OrHTtl 

[ •T^t-£H00  00'^00lCTH0505TiHTtlO05  05  05THOO05-rH0d00«01C0S* 

•00t»|OC0t-:01ClCTiHl0rHrH  THrH(0005|  liHrHCOI 

•ool-^  I jrHjiH  j 1 I 

Penal  } 

OC0OC0C5':0rH05'^05?DOlC05iH05iHl>C005TtllClCC0C0C005«C' 
OC0OrHlC051ClC05  05Tt^lCC-?0TtlTj^05  00  C0OTtlTt<'^lHrHC5C:05 

1 lCOOG5  05lH«0C0O  05  05TtiTji00{H05  05TliiC0505050505£HlH0505 

1 ©&rHO0505«0?D00iOC0OOr-iC«C’C005'r-iOC000C00505-rHC0e0?0 
IH  rH05Tt(J:-COlOCC05£-50:COOCO:01ClCl0  0505iHT}<05?0^ 
<iHtHO5  05  05  05'^COC0COC0'^1C1C?O 

Per 

Cent 

1 • • C- 05  05  00 05  «D  «0  «D  Tf  O tH  05  CO  05  C- rH  00  00  05  C- 00  05 

1 • • O O Tti  Tti  O O O O i>  CO  05  O O TjH  05  O IC  Tt<  00  rH  05  CO  Tt<  tH 

. • O 05  tH  CO  CO  05  rH  Tji  CO  05  Tj<  tH  rH  rH  105  50  IrH  rH  rH  I 

: M " 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 

Chari- 

table 

$ 

650 

3300 

7289 

48840 

114560 

154267 

121997 

108829 

159270 

287036 

633230 

934600 

807234 

706352 

706430 

635100 

608116 

743810 

1241550 

1169585 

1335237 

1452985 

1615450 

1651287 

2269119 

1933200 

1896081 

Per 

Cent 

CO  00  05  IC  uo  05  lCl>-CO05O5  00  CO  rH  05  t- 05  CO  tH 

1 ||^^®j*'^|'^  1 OOTt(C5|lC05  rH  00 

Educa- 

tional 

rH  kC  05  05  00  Ttl  I>  CO  rH  05  rH  IC  ic  00  CO  t- Tt(  lO  Tl<  C5  00 

Fiscal 

Period 

1846-48 

1848-50 

1850-52 

1852-54 

1864- 56 
1857 

1858- 59 

1859- 61 
1861-63 
1863-65 

1865- 67 
1867-69 
1869-71 
1871-73 
1873-75 
1875-77 
1877-79 
1879  81 
1881-83 
1883-85 
1885-87 
1887-89 
1889-91 
1891-93 
1893-95 
1895-97 
1897-99 
1899-01 

16 


C.  COMPARATIVE  STATISTICS. 

We  shall  be  able  to  realize  more  fully  the  striking  significance  of 
this  enlargement  in  the  institutional  accounts  in  Iowa’s  budget  if 
we  measure  the  expenditures  in  the  light  of  the  growth  of  popu- 
ation  and  wealth  and  contrast  them  with  similar  expenditures  in 
other  states. 

The  population  of  Iowa  increased  from  192,214  in  1850  to  2,231,853 
in  1900.  Estimatinsr  the  wealth  of  the  state  in  1900  upon  the  basis  of 
the  ratio  of  increase  from  1880  to  189)  (the  returns  of  the  last  census 
have  not  yet  been  published)  Iowa’s  wealth  increased  from 
$23,714,638  in  1850  to  $3,026,161,844  in  190!>.  The  per  capita  wealth  in- 
creased from  $122  to  $1,359  in  fifty  years.  The  annual  expenditures 
for  institutions  during  that  time  increased  from  $1,065  to  $1,765,419. 
Meantime  the  sources  of  the  states  income,  namely  the  valuation  of 
the  property  assessed  for  taxation,  increased  but  little  compared  with 
the  increases  just  noted.  The  assessment  of  1850  was  returned  at 
$22,623,334  or  $117.75  per  capita  and  the  returns  of  1890  amounted  to 
only  $539,753,759  or  $241.84  per  capita.  The  increases  in  population, 
true  wealth  and  the  valuation  of  taxable  property  by  decades  are  pre- 
sented in  Table  V below. 


TABLE  V— POPULATIOlSr,  WEALTH  AND  AS- 
SESSABLE PROPERTY  OF  IOWA. 


Year 

Popula- 

tion 

True 

Wealth 

Per 

Capita 

Taxable 

Property 

Per 

Capita 

1850 

192214 

$23714638 

$ 122 

$22623334 

$117.75 

1860 

674913 

247338265 

366 

205166983 

303.93 

1870 

1194020 

717644750 

601 

302515418 

253 . 36 

1880 

1624615 

1721000000 

1059 

398671251 

245.39 

1890 

1911896 

2287348333 

1196 

519216110 

271.59 

1900 

2231853 

*3026161844 

1359 

539753759 

241.84 

^Estimate  based  on  increase  from  1880  to  1890. 


The  increase  in  the  annual  expenditures  for  the  various  classes  of 
institutions  maintained  by  the  state  of  Iowa  is  shown  in  the  succeed- 
ing table.  The  amounts  given  are  one  half  the  sums  expended  for 
the  biennial  period  covering  the  decennial  years.  The  outlays  for  edu- 
cational institutions  has  increased  from  $5,477  in  1860  or  less  than  one 
cent  per  capita  to  $363,224  in  1900  or  a trifle  over  sixteen  cents  per 
capita.  From  one  mill  per  capita  in  1850  the  state  expenditures  for 
charitable  institutions  increased  to  42.4  cents  in  1900.  The  expense 
of  maintaining  the  penal  and  reformatory  institutions  has  increased 
from  two  mills  ner  capita  to  nearly  fourteen  cents.  It  will  be  noted 
that  the  expenditures  for  the  penal  and  educational  institutions  con- 
tinue nearly  the  same  throughout  the  fifty  years.  The  per  capita  ex- 
penditures for  all  institutions  increased  from  five  mills  in  1850  to  17.1 
cents  in  1860,  to  49.4  cents  in  1870.  For  1880  the  per  capita  decreased 


17 


to  31.6  cents  but  it  jumped  up  to  56.2  'cents  in  1890;  and  last  year 
it  was  nearly  80  cents  per  inhabitant.  As  the  amounts  given  are  for 
all  expenditures  the  decrease  in  1880  in  the  outlays  for  the  educational 
and  charitable  institutions  was  probably  due  to  a decrease  of  the  ap- 
propriations for  buildings  during  that  period. 


TABLE  YI— ANNUAL  INSTITUTIONAL  EXPENDITURES  OF 
IOWA  FOR  DECENNIAL  YEARS. 


Year 

Educa- 

tional 

Per 

Cap. 

Chari- 

table 

1 

Per 

Cap. 

Penal 

1 

Per 

Cap. 

Miscel- 

laneous 

Per 

Cap. 

Total 

Inst’n 

Per. 

Cap 

1850 

S 

S 325 

.001 

$ 516 

.002 

$ 223 

.001 

$ 1065 

.005 

1860 

5477 

’6o8 

60998 

.09 

39179 

.058 

10267 

.015 

116923 

.171 

1870 

59403 

.049 

467300 

.391 

38737 

.032 

24784 

.02 

590226 

.494 

1880 

43181 

,026 

8040'9 

.187 

130744 

.08 

35359 

.021 

513344 

.316 

1890 

121310 

.064 

726495 

.379 

161123 

.084 

75547 

.039 

1084526 

.662 

1900 

363224 

.162 

948040 

.424 

308113 

.138 

145666 

.063 

1765044 

.791 

But  while  there  has  been  almost  a steady  increase  in  the  expendi- 
tures for  institutions  in  Iowa  the  cost  of  the  judicial,  executive,  and 
legislative  branches  and  the  incidental  expenses  of  the  state  gov- 
ernment have  decreased.  From  1850  to  1870  the  per  capita  outlay  rose 
from  9.8  cents  to  31.8  cents;  it  then  decreased  to  22.9  cents  in  1890. 
In  19  jO  the  other  general  expenses  of  the  state  amounted  to  23.6  cents 
per  citizen  as  against  79. 1 cents  for  institutions.  These  increases  to- 
gether with  the  total  and  per  capita  cost  of  the  state  government  of 
Iowa  for  the  decennial  years  are  given  in  Table  VII. 


TABLE  VII— INSTITUTIONAL  AND  OTHER  STATE  EX- 
PENDITURES OF  IOWA. 


Year 

Popula- 

tion 

Institu- 

tions 

Per 

Cap 

Gen.  State 
Exp. 

Per 

Cap 

Grand 

Total 

Per 

Cap 

1850 

192214 

$1065 

'$.005 

$18943 

$.098 

$20008 

$.103 

1860 

674913 

115923 

.171 

179190 

.265 

295113 

.436 

1870 

1194020 

590225 

.494 

379702 

.318 

969927 

.812 

1880 

1624615 

513344 

.316 

461811 

.284 

975165 

.600 

1890 

1911896 

1084526 

.562 

437491 

.229 

1522017 

.791 

1900 

2231853 

1765044 

.791 

523854 

.235 

2289274 

1.026 

The  financial  history  of  American  states  has  been  similar  to  that 
of  Iowa  with  respect  to  the  growth  of  institutional  expenditures  in 
their  budgets.  Few  states  expend  a larger  proportion  of  their  reven- 
ues for  institutions  than  Iowa,  although  many  of  course  spend  larger 
sums  than  Iowa  does.  In  Table  VIII  are  presented  the  institutional 
expenditures  of  fourteen  states  together  with  their  total  state  budgets. 
The  states  of  Connecticut,  Pennsylvania,  Alabama,  Missouri,  and 


18 


California  disburse  money  from  their  state  treasuries  for  the  support 
of  their  county  and  common  schools  which  is  not  the  case  in  the  other 
states  taken.  To  make  the  comparison  uniform  throughout  those 
amounts  should  be  deducted: — In  Table  IX  showing  proportions,  this 
is  done.  In  per  capita  expenditures  for  educational  institutions  Iowa 
ranks  below  all  of  the  states  taken  except  Massachussetts  and  Ohio. 
Excluding  the  common  schools  Iowa  expends  more  than  Pennsylvania, 
Connecticut,  Alabama  or  California.  She  ranks  with  the  majority  in 
outlays  for  charitable  institutions 


TABLE  Vm— COMPARATIVE  STATE  EXPENDITURES  FOR  INSTITUTIONS  AND  STATE  BUDGETS.  (ANNUAL) 


iscal  Year 

Ends 

ер.  80, 1900 

ес.  31, 1900 

ep.  30, 1900 

ov.  30, 1899 

ep.  30, 1900 

ep.  90, 1900 

ov.  15, 1900 

un.  30, 1900 

lep  30, 1900 

ul.  31, 1900 

an.  30, 1900 

^0.30,1900 

'ec.  31, 1^00 

un.  80, 1900 

un  30,1900 

Per 

Cap. 

cc  so  r- oi  CO  CO  CO 

Oi’^cococooco»oiooic<iicoocr50i 

<M  CO  <M  W <M  rH  T-t  (M  -rH  CO  t-H  i>  CD  t-I 

§© 

Grand  Total 

of  all 

Expendit’rs 

$2534496 

9655621 

20848535 

15336838 

3480534 

2198420 

5124382 

5222234 

'.7035167 

6120164 

650672 

1016741 

4618272 

9518608 

2289274 

Per 

Cap. 

lO  os  00  tH  tH  -r-l  Tfi  CD  CO  CO  T-, 

OOt-OSlOOSlOOOlOlOi-IOO'^-r-lOS 
i0NC<ii0OC-0S  05  05t:-C0CDt-Ti<C- 

T-l  -tHt-I 

QQ 

03  -je 

050STt^»Oi-IC<i<MJOt-»Ot-OS05i>-'^ 

OCOCD-'^WOSOCOOSOOOQOCOCO'^ 

COOOO<?4CDOOIO(M(MCDCDOOOO?>-0 

1— 1 

OS  00  l>*  lO  CD  CD  CD  CO  lO 

CO£>-Tt(t-OQOi>iOOOCD03£-OiCCD 
'^lOrtHt-t-COt-OSOOiOCDCOlOC- 
T-H  CO  OS  OS  rM  CO  (M CO  (M  CD  tH 

e© 

Per 

Cap. 

COCDTt^t-NCOt-lOCOCDlOCDlOC-CO 

iOiOC00005'^r>t-OTt<<M(M(M05CD 

(MtH<MOOOOOi-i^OOOt-iO 

@© 

1 cc 

O 

0 S 

1 §• 

lO-pHlOOOCO-fHOSCDt-OOCDCDCDCOCD 

OSCQt-CDC-iOCDTHlOOOi-i-^iOCOCD 

t-Tt<lO'^tOO(MT)HTiHO^O»i:SCD'r-ICD 

OSOtOOOOOOSOWt-CDOr-OSWUO 

CQTjHOOOiXMOOOSlO-rHlMit-OSrJH 

§5 

C?Ttl£-lOTM  COTH-rt^O?  a y-t 

e©  y-f 

Per 

Cap. 

OOOSi-tOSCOThOsiO-rHOOOSNOSTjHOO 

(MOSOTj^COOOSJOOOS'^t-Ot-CO 

C0'^C«OO'r-lTH,-lT-l'^(MOTHrJHi-l 

«© 

Penal 

CDTl^OSCOCDt-lOOO'r-IOOOt-CDOSCO 
0S00'^C-1O(M(M03tHCDO'^10'^tH 
CDOSCDOStJIuOIOOOOIOOO’-H'^'^ 
t-OOSWOSi-HOSt-lOtCiOt-OOOlCX) 
OS05»Ot-iCOOSOIJ>-C30C-0£-COOO 
05  tJH  CO  rH  00  00  1-1  CO  t- CO 

€©-rH  tH 

Per 

Cap. 

05  05  00  OS  00  05  00  CO  CO  CD  CO 

tH10050StJ<CO£-'^C50QC0051005 

T}<'>!tiOOC005-^l010TlKCDCDCOC50'?*^ 

^ y-i 

Chari- 

table 

$374280 

1267308 

6019783 

2517036 

280410 

212789 

2379610 

1328351 

2046771 

1056410 

244691 

358052 

684867 

1564607 

948040 

Per 

Cap. 

05  CD  OS  00  OS  00  CO  CO -i-l  00  05 

0SC0C005050Sl0O^OC0O000SCD 
lO,-(0005'^0'>^CO)OTt05COCDi-H 

«©  tH  05 

Educa- 

tional 

,*$537587 

469324 

262886 

1*6432767 

1 272881 
' *902324 
246896 
968436 
1531031 
881518 
173900 
215249 
*1205158 
*3994546 
363224 

Pop. 

1900 

908420 

2805346 

7268894 

6302115 

1188044 

1828697 

4157545 

2420982 

4821550 

1751394 

401570 

1066300 

3106665 

1485053 

2231853 

State 

• 

Conn 

Mass 

New  York 

Penn 

Maryland 

Alabama. 

Ohio 

Michigan 
Illinois  . . 

Minn 

So.  Dak . . 
Nebraska 
Missouri . 
Califor’ia 
Iowa 

^Includes  Expenditures  for  County  and  Common  Schools, 
flncludes  Biennial  Fiscal  Periods,  one-half  taken. 


20 


But  while  Iowa  does  not  spenn  so  much  as  do  some  of  her  sister 
states  but  one  state  out  of  the  fourteen  taken  expends  a greater  per 
centage  of  its  revenues  for  institutional  purposes.  South  Dakota 
exceeds  Iowa,  spending  in  1900  81.2  per  cent  for  state  institutions 
while  Iowa  expended  77.1  per  cent.  Ohio  comes  next  disbursing  73.6 
per  cent.  But  one  state,  Ohio,  spends  a greater  proportion  than  Iowa 
for  charitable  institutions,  the  former  expending  46.4  per  cent  and 
the  latter  41.4.  Michigan,  Illinois,  South  Dakota,  and  Nebraska  rank 
above  Iowa  in  the  proportion  of  outlays  going  for  educational  insti- 
tutions. But  four  states,  Connecticut,  Massachussetts,  Ohio,  and 
Illinois,  devote  a greater  per  centage  to  penal  and  reformatory  institu- 
tions. 

In  the  following  Table  IX  the  percentage  is  figured  on  the  basis  of 
the  entire  state  budget  of  the  state  and  not  upon  the  total  institution- 
al expenditures.  The  per  centages  in  the  fourth  column  headed  “Total 
institutions’’  are  not  obtained  by  adding  the  first  three  columns  but 
represent  the  per  centage  which  the  total  institutional  expenditures 
in  Table  VIII  are  of  ^the  total  state  budget.  The  expenditures  for 
common  and  county  schools  in  Connecticut,  Pennsylvania,  Alabama, 
Missouri,  and  California  have  been  excluded  in  this  computation. 


TABLE  IX— SHOWING  PROPORTIONATE  OUTLAYS  FOR  IN- 
STITUTIONS IN  VARIOUS  STATES. 


States 

Educa- 

tional 

Chari- 

table 

Penal 

Total 

Instit’s 

Other 
Sta.  Ex. 

Connecticut 

3.9 

17 

14.3 

47.3 

52.7 

Massachusetts 

4.8 

13.1 

14,5 

37 

63 

New  York 

1.2 

28.8 

7 

45.3 

54.7 

Pennsylvania 

1.1 

37.2 

4.7 

52.5 

47.5 

Maryland 

7.8 

8 

1 1 

20.1 

79.9 

Alabama 

8 

15.8 

13.5 

42.3 

57.7 

Ohio 

4.7 

46.4 

16.1 

73.6 

26.4 

Michigan 

18.5 

25.4 

9.3 

56.6 

43.4 

Illinois 

21.7 

29 

6.9 

65.1 

34.9 

Minnesota  .... 

14.4 

17.2 

14.2 

50 

50 

South  Dakota 

26.7 

37.6 

16.1 

81.8 

18.2 

Nebraska 

21.1 

35.2 

2.7 

66.6 

33.4 

Missouri 

4.2 

19.2 

9.4 

35  1 

64.9 

California 

8.1 

25.5 

11.4 

49.9 

50.1 

Iowa 

15.8 

41.4 

14.3 

77.1 

22.9 

The  marked  difference  between  the  expenditures  for  Charitable  and 
Educational  Institutions  in  some  of  the  Eastern  States  and  those  in 
the  Western  States  is  due  in  the  main  to  the  fact  that  in  the  east 
large  expenditures  for  such  purposes  have  not  been  deemed  necessary 
or  urgent  because  of  the  existence  of  numercfus  well  endowed  and 
well  equipped  private  institutions  that  satisfy  the  needs  of  the  people 
of  those  states. 


21 


IL 

SOURCES  OF  REVENUE. 

The  revenue  that  is  required  to  carry  on  the  work  of  the  institu- 
tions of  the  state  of  Iowa  is  obtained  from  various  sources.  For  most 
of  them  the  bulk  of  their  income  is  derived  from  appropriations  of 
revenue  in  the  State  Treasury  which  is  obtained  from  the  collections 
of  taxes  assessed  on  the  property  of  citizens  in  the  counties,  collected 
by  local  treasurers  and  by  them  covered  into  the  state  treasury,  and 
from  taxes  and  fees  collected  from  corporations. 

It  is  probable  that  most  tax  payers  assume  that  the  state  has  ob- 
tained all  of  the  revenue  with  which  it  has  established  and  maintained 
the  institutions  now  regularly  included  in  the  state  budget,  from  the 
annual  state  levy.  Their  assumption,  however,  is  only  partially 
correct.  There  are  a number  of  what  I may  call  Supplementary 
Sources  of  revenue  that  play  an  important  part  in  the  finances  of 
some  of  the  institutions.  These  must  be  duly  considered  if  we 
would  fully  measure  the  real  or  exact  cost  of  their  maintenance  and 
appreciate  the  actual  financial  burden  borne  by  the  tax  payers  in 
sustaining  them. 

The  various  institutions  here  classified  as  “Miscellaneous”  are  sup- 
ported directly  and  wholly  by  appropriations  of  funds  in  the  state 
treasury  “not  otherwise  appropriated.  ” Likewise  the  Teachers  In- 
stitutes, the  Benedict  Home,  the  Prisoners  Aid  Association,  have 
been  maintained  solely — so  far  as  the  state  was  concerned,  out  of 
the  general  revenue  fund  of  the  state.  The  Agricultural  Societies  or 
Associations,  the  Benedict  Home,  and  the  Prisoners’  Aid  Association 
are  private  corporations  and  have  other  sources  of  income  than  the 
State  Treasury,  but  they  are  not  considered  here. 

Of  the  institutions  under  the  Board  of  Oontrol  the  two  Industrial 
or  Reform  Schools  at  Eldora  and  Mitchellville  are,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  income  represented  in  products  raised  and  consumed  at 
those  institutions  (to  be  considered  later)  supported  entirely  by  drafts 
on  the  state  treasury.  In  case  the  state  furnishes  transportation  and 
clothing  to  inmates  of  the  School  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  or  for  the 
Feeble-Minded  the  cost  is  charged  against  the  counties  from  which 
they  come.  The  sum  charged  is  certified  to  the  Auditor  of  the  Coun- 
ty who  collects  the  amount  by  suit  if  necessary  and  transmits  it  to 
the  State  Treasury.  The  same  is  true  for  the  College  for  the  Blind  as 
regards  clothing  furnislied  inmates.  The  amounts  received  at  the 
State  Treasury  for  the  biennial  period  ending  June  30,  1899  on  these 
accounts  for  the  institutions  just  mentioned  were  |5,094.39  for  the 
Deaf  and  Dumb,  $19,275.67  for  the  Feeble  Minded,  and  $1,299.21  for 
the  Blind.  The  general  expense  or  cost  of  supporting  the  inmates  of 
these  institutions  is  borne  by  the  State  Treasury. 

A different  rule  obtains  in  the  case  of  the  institutions  for  the  indi- 
gent orphans  and  for  the  insane.  The  immediate  cost  of  sunporting 
soldiers’  orphans  or  indigent  orphans  at  the  Home  in  Davenport  is 
made  a direct  charge  upon  the  counties  whence  they  are  received, 


22 


The  amount  is'or  may  be  collected  by  the  counties  liable  in  the  same 
manner  as  other  local  tax  levies.  For  the  two  years  ending  June  30, 
1899,  156,834  52  was  receipted  for  on  this  account  by  the  Treasurer  of 
State.  Thirty  six  counties  out  of  the  ninety  nine  in  the  state  paid 
nothing  for  the  care  of  orphans  at  the  Home  the  total  expenditures  for 
that  period  on  account  of  Orphans’  Home  was  $106, 892, 22, the  sixty- three 
counties  contributing  over  56  per  cent  of  the  support.  It  is  not  exactly 
clear  from  the  provisions  of  the  Code  to  what  extent  the  county  author- 
ities are  expected  to  collect  the  amounts  charged  against  them  for  the 
support  of  orphans  from  their  guardians  or  parents  or  relatives.  How 
much  is  obtained  from  such  sources  and  how  much  from  the  ordin- 
ary tax  levy  for  such  purposes  can  not  be  shown  as  the  reports  do  not 
differentiate  the  sums  received  from  the  two  sources. 

The  cost  of  maintaining  the  state  hospitals  for  the  insane  is  met 
partly  from  the  general  tax  levies  and  partly  from  special  levies  and 
receipts  from  private  sources.  Parents  or  relatives  may  pay  the 
expense  of  an  inmate’s  care  at  one  of  the  Hospitals  and  the  local 
authorities  may  collect  the  amount  charged  them  by  action  or  suit 
against  their  estates ; but  here  again  what  proportion  is  obtained 
from  private  individuals  and  what  from  special  levies  made  to  meet 
the  insane  account  can  not  be  even  estimated  because  the  financial 
reports  do  not  separate  the  returns.  It  may  be  presumed  that  a very 
considerable  proportion  is  obtained  direct  from  private  parties  relat- 
ed to  the  insane,  a greater  proportion,  undoubtedly,  than  in  the 
case  of  the  Orphans’  Home.  For  the  biennial  fiscal  period  of  1897-99 
the  amount  expended  for  the  insane  hospitals  aggregated  $1,157,027 
and  62  per  cent,  of  that  amount,  viz.,  $727,550.11  was  collected  from 
the  counties  as  a special  insane  tax. 

Before  passing  on  we  should  note  what  is  by  many  considered  a 
serious  evil  that  has  risen  in  our  state  as  a direct  result  of  the  diff- 
erence in  the  methods  pursued  in  supporting  the  several  institutions. 
The  fact  that  the  cost  of  maintenance  at  the  Industrial  or  Reform 
Schools  and  at  the  Feeble  Minded  Institutions  is  met  entirely  by 
drafts  on  the  funds  in  the  State  Treasury  and  the  expense  of  caring 
for  orphan  children  at  the  Home  at  Davenport  is  charged  against  the 
county  treasuries  has  led  to  many  destitute  children,  morally,  physic- 
ally and  mentally  sound,  being  sent  by  County  Boards  either  to  the 
schools  for  incorrigibles  or  the  Feeble  Minded  Institution  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  escaping  the  burden  of  their  support.  The  results,  as  has 
frequently  been  pointed  out  by  the  heads  of  our  institutions,  are  de- 
plorable, and  utterly  bad.  There  is  no  apparent  justification  for 
these  differences  in  the  methods  of  supporting  the  institutions.  From 
the  very  nature  of  the  case  the  entire  body  politic  is  as  much  inter- 
ested in  the  maintenance  of  the  Orphans’  Home  and  the  Insane  Hos- 
pitals or  of  the  Feeble  Minded  Institutions  as  are  the  immediate  rela- 
tives or  friends  of  the  persons  so  unfortunate  as  to  make  it  necessary 
to  place  them  within  such  institutions.  Furthermore  there  is  no 
obvious  reason  why  one  course  should  be  pursued  in  providing  for 
support  with  one  institution  and  another  method  with  another  insti- 


23 


tution  when  there  is  no  essential  difference  between  the  institutions 
viewed  from  the  stand  point  of  their  support  and  financial  necessities. 
Even  conceding  that  it  may  be  advisable  to  require  counties  to  pay 
the  cost  of  their  resident  insane,  or  of  destitute  orphans  it  is  unwise 
both  as  a matter  of  public  policy  and  as  a matter  of  business  to  con- 
tinue the  present  methods  that  encourage  a practice  which  either  ed- 
ucates criminals  or  else  places  young  boys  and  girls  amidst  associates 
whose  presence  depresses  and  enervates  youthful  minds  at  a time 
when  they  need  the  utmost  encouragement  to  attain  to  a healthy,  self 
dependant  maturity.* 

Passing  on  to  the  Soldiers’  Home,  the  most  important  supplement- 
ary source  of  revenue  for  this  institution  is  the  Congressional  appro- 
priation for  Dependant  Veteran  Soldiers  and  Sailors.  For  the  fiscal 
period  of  1897-99  there  were  state  Auditor’s  warrants  drawn  to  meet 
appropriations  to  the  amount  of  1166,587.83  and  during  that  same  per- 
iod there  was  received  from  the  national  government  ^101,344. 84,  near- 
ly two  thirds  the  cost  of  the  maintenance  of  the  Soldier’s  Home.  In 
former  years  not  an  inconsiderable  source  of  revenue  was  the  excess 
pension  money  taken  from  inmates  of  the  Home  but  recent  legisla- 
tion has  done  away  with  this^source. 

For  the  support  of  the  penitentiary  at  Fort  Madison  the  state  ob- 
tained during  the  two  years  ending  June  30,  1899  over  one  half  the 
cost  of  the  institution  from  the  sale  of  the  labor  of  the  convicts. 

The  amount  expended  was  |137,525. 71  and  the  amount  paid  over  to  the 
Treasurer  of  State  by  the  warden  was  $60,685.02.  The  revenue  receiv- 
ed from  the  penitentiary  at  Anamosa  is  a small  item  so  far  as  the 
State  Treasurer’s  books  indicate  but  here  we  must  not  overlook  the 
very  considerable  money  value  represented  in  the  labor  of  the  convicts 
in  the  construction  of  the  state  buildings  at  that  institution.  Before 
its  abandonment  in  1900  the  Industrial  School  for  the  Blind  at  Knox- 
ville carried  on  for  the  employment  and  benefit  of  the  inmates  vari- 
ous industries,  the  products  of  which  were  sold  and  the  proceeds 


*At  the  close  of  the  meeting  of  the  Superintendents  of  the  Institutions  under  the 
Board  of  Control,  on  June  19th.  at  which  time  the  above  was  read,  the  Superintendents 
of  the  two  Reform  Schools,  in  conversation  with  the  writer,  took  exception  to  the 
statement  respecting  the  harmful  effects  of  the  existing  divergencies  in  financial  meth- 
ods noted  in  the  text.  They  contended  that  all  who  had  been  sent  there  are  inclined  to 
criminality  or  incorrigibility  and  that  they  are  therefore  proper  subjects  for  the  Reform 
Schools.  The  .Superintendent  of  the  Soldiers’  Orphans’  Home  rejoined  that  his  experi- 
ence led  him  to  agree  with  the  writer’s  contention ; that  he  knew  of  numerous  cases  where 
county  authorities  had  sent  children  to  the  Reform  Schools  whose  only  offense  consist- 
ed of  their  orphan  state  and  certain  mischievous  propensities  that  could  have  been 
easily  eradicated  in  the  Home  at  Davenport,  because  it  was  cheaper  for  the  counties  to 
.send  them  to  the  former.  While  it  may  be  conceded  that  all  who  are  sent  to  the  Indus- 
trial Schools  are  technically  and  actually  inclined  to  vicious  habits,  yet  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  where  there  is  a decided  pecuniary  inducement  ever  presented  to  our  Boards 
of  Supervisors,  the  probabilities  are  great  that  advantage  will  be  taken  of  it— not  al- 
wavs  consciously,  perhaps,  but  nevertheless  taken.  And  with  children  under  fourteen 
years  of  age  anyway,  it  is  always  the  presumption  that  the  atmosphere  of  an  orphanage 
tends  to  greater  and  more  rapid  mental  advancement  than  the  environment  of  a Re- 
form School,  no  matter  how  excellent  the  latter  may  be  managed. 


24 


paid  in  part  to  inmates  and  in  part  into  the  state  treasury.  During 
the  fiscal  period  of  1897-99  |19,902.99  was  received  from  such  sales 
while  the  gross  cost  of  the  institution  amounted  to  S36,823.76.  The 
actual  disbursements  authorized  made  from  the  state  treasury  however 
aggregated  only  $26,785.87.  This  apparent  discrepancy  arises  from  the 
fact  that  during  the  first  year  of  that  biennium  the  institution  auth- 
orities bought,  sold  and  accounted  for  their  manufactured  articles 
and  supplies'and  the  state  simply  made  good  any  deficit  experienced. 

By  no  means  the  least  important  of  the  supplementary  sources  of 
revenue  drawn  on  constantly  for  the  support  of  most  of  the  institu- 
tions under  the  Board  of  Control  and  for  the  College  of  Agriculture 
and  Mechanic  Arts  at  Ames  is  the  income  represented  in  the  products 
raised  or  manufactured  at  the  institutions  and  therein  for  the  most 
part  consumed.  The  products  actually  sold  and  the  sums  received 
therefor  have  already  been  referred  to ; but  in  addition  to  this  most 
of  the  institutions  raise  on  their  lands  large  amounts  of  hay,  cereals 
and  vegetables,  produce  great  quantities  of  milk  and  butter,  beef 
and  pork  and  these  products  are  consumed  at  the  institutions.  Fur- 
thermore there  are  vast  quantities  of  necessary  articles  produced  by 
inmates  of  the  institutions  such  as  brooms,  wooden  ware,  clothes  and 
bed  furnishings  and  an  immense  amount  of  labor  performed  by  in- 
mates in  the  conduct  of  the  institutions.  It  is  evident  on  a moments 
reflection  tliat  if  the  state  snould  go  into  the  market  to  purchase  the 
commodities  produced  from  the  farms  and  gardens  and  industries  of 
the  institutions  it  would  require  inuch  larger  outlays  to  maintain 
the  institutions.  The  money  value  or  market  price  of  all  the  articles 
so  raised  and  consumed  at  the  institutions  and  the  services  of  inmates 
should  be  duly  considered  and  included  in  reckoning  ui)  the  income 
and  expense  accounts  of  our  state  institutions.  For  the  year  ending 
June  30,  1900  the  reported  market  value  of  the  farm  products  raised 
and  consumed  at  the  Hospital  for  the  Insane  at  Mt.  Pleasant  amounted 
to  111,802.62  and  the  value  of  the  articles  manufactured  by  the  inmates 
or  emifloyees  reached  $7,580.61 — a total  of  $19,383.23.  At  some  of  the 
other  institutions  the  amounts  are  larger  because  of  greater  facilities 
for  farming  or  manufacture.  Up  to  the  present  time  the  reports  of 
the  financial  officers  of  the  institutions  have  not  always  or  systema- 
tically shown  the  value  of  these  sources  of  supply;  but  from  July  1, 
1901,  I am  informed  the  value  of  all  products  and  manufactured  ar- 
ticles consumed  in  or  about  the  institutions  under  the  Board  of  Con- 
trol will  be  reported.  With  these  reports  it  will  be  possible  to  ar- 
rive at  the  exact  money  cost  of  carrying  on  the  several  state  institu- 
tions 

The  supplementary  sources  of  income  of  the  educational  institu- 
tions yet  remain  to  be  considered. 

For  the  biennial  period  closing  June  30,  1899  the  total  expense  of 
the  Normal  School  at  Cedar  Falls  amounted  to  $151,881.49  according 
to  the  report  of  the  treasurer  of  the  institution.  But  only  $89,084.60 
of  that  sum  was  disbursed  from  the  State  Treasury  on  account  of  the 
Normal  School.  The  balance  of  the  income  of  the  institution  at 


25 


Cedar  Falls  came  from  students  fees  and  tuitions  and  a few  miscellan- 
eous sources. 

During  the  same  period  the  Agricultural  College  at  Ames  cost  the 
tax  payers  direct  164,731.86,  but  this  amount  represents  only  about 
one  fourth  of  the  entire  expense  of  that  institution.  The  supplemen- 
tary sources  of  revenue  drawn  upon  were  five  in  number  viz.  (1) 
Students  fees,  rentals  and  tuitions,  relatively  small  in  amount,  how- 
ever; (2)  Rentals  of  College  lands;  13)  Sales  of  produce;  (4)  Con- 
gressional appropriations  and  (5)  The  College  endowment  fund. 
Owing  to  the  change  in  the  date  of  the  fiscal  period  of  the  College 
reports  the  exact  amount  received  from  these  sources  for  the  biennium 
of  1897-99  can  not  be  given.  The  Secretary  reports  the  net  income 
from  sales  of  farms,  dairy,  and  mechanical  products  at  155,521.43. 
From  the  national  government  under  the  Morrill  Act  |47,000  was 
received  (the  amount  is  now  |50,000  per  biennium).  The  College  En- 
dowment Fund — which  represents  the  proceeds  of  sales  of  lands  given 
the  state  in  1862  by  Congress  to  endow  or  establish  the  school  and 
accumulated  interest  which  from  time  to  time  has  been  added  to  the 
fund  all  of  which  is  loaned  out  upon  farm  mortgages — produced 
$75,775.10  during  the  two  years  here  considered.  On  July  1,  1899  the 
total  Endowment  Fund  including  the  appraised  value  of  some  college 
lauds  amounted  to  $682,823.52.  The  amount  of  the  Fund  and  the 
income  therefrom  are  much  less  than  it  would  otherwise  be  because 
of  an  unfortunate  arrangement  entered  upon  many  years  ago  regard- 
ing the  disposal  of  the  College  lands.  Some  200,000  acres  of  Iowa 
lands  were  leased  at  a rental  of  8 per  cent,  of  the  value  appraised 
at  the  commencement  of  the  leases  with  the  option  given  the  lessees 
of  purchase  at  the  expiration  of  the  leases  at  the  original  appraised 
value.  The  result  has  been  that  the  College  has  given  title  deeds  to 
thousands  of  acres  of  fine  lands  sold  at  $2,  $3  and  $5  an  acre 
that  are  today  easily  worth  and  would  command  $20,  $30,  and  $40 
per  acre. 

The  State  University  obtains  a large  part  of  its  income  from  the 
.same  kinds  of  sources  as  the  institution  at  Ames.  The  proportions 
however,  obtained  from  the  various  sources,  differ  very  much. 
While  at  Ames  but  little  is  obtained  from  tuitions,  the  University 
during  the  period  of  1897-99  received  $119,826.57  from  tuitions,  about 
one-third  of  its  income.  Nothing  at  all  is  derived  from  productive 
industries.  From  its  endowment  fund  the  interest  receipts  aggregated 
$32,543.19.  Occasionally  there  are  private  gifts  and  donations  that 
come  into  the  University  of  lands  or  money  but  they  do  not  consti- 
tute a regular  and  noteworthy  item  in  its  income.  The  same  obser- 
vations are  applicable  respecting  the  management  of  the  University 
Endowment  Fund  that  were  made  regarding  the  Endowment  Fund 
of  the  institution  at  Ames.  Some  46,000  acres  were  given  the  state 
by  Congress  for  use  in  founding  a University ; and  later  there  was 
added  the  so  called  Saline  lands;  making  in  all  61,310  acres  that  the 
TTniversity  received.  The  bulk  of  the  first  grant  was  sold  by  the 
early  trustees  at  an  average  price  of  $3.25  an  acre.  Various  protests 


26 


against  the  hasty  and  ill  advised  sales  of  the  land  and  some  attempts 
to  prevent  them  were  made  prior  to  1860  but  with  little  avail. — (See 
Annals  of  Iowa  Vol.  IV  pp  16-24. ) The  total  fund  possessed  by  the 
University  on  June  30,  1899  was  only  $235,120.36.  This  is  loaned  out 
on  farm  mortgages  as  is  the  case  with  the  Endowment  Fund  of  the 
Agricultural  College.  Besides  its  income  from  tuition  and  its  endow- 
ment fund  the  University  received  during  the  period  here  taken  the 
sum  of  $234,485  from  the  State  Treasury.  For  the  support  of  the 
University  there  are  now  standing  appropriations  aggregating  S126,- 
000  per  annum.  In  addition  there  has  been  allowed  that  institution 
for  a period  of  eleven  years  commencing  with  1897  the  proceeds  of  a 
special  annual  tax  up  to  $55^000. 

In  one  instance,  noted  in  a previous  section,  resort  was  had  to  the 
funding  power  of  the  state  to  obtain  revenue  for  an  institution,  viz., 
for  the  Penitentiary  at  Fort  Madison.  This  power  was  utilized  dur- 
ing the  first  four  years  of  the  state  government  at  a time  when  the 
state  was  getting  its  fiscal  machinery  into  working  order  and  before 
sufficient  returns  could  be  realized  from  the  tax  levies  to  carry  on  all 
of  the  work  of  the  state  government.  So  far  as  I can  discover  the 
bonding  power  has  never  been  directly  resorted  to  since  and  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  events  never  will  be  again.  But  while  bonds  have 
not  been  issued  expressly  to  secure  funds  for  institutions  resort  has 
been  had  to  two  makeshifts  in  the  way  of  anticipating  revenue  receipts 
that  in  character  and  in  effect  approach  closely  the  funding  power ; 
and  both  are  methods  to  be  discouraged — nay  more,  absolutely  prohib- 
ited if  we  would  secure  and  maintain  that  control  over  our  state  ex- 
penditures which  experience  has  shown  should  be  exercised  in  order 
to  attain  complete  accountibility  of  executive  or  administrative 
officers  for  funds  placed  in  their  charge. 

In  1896  an  appropriation  was  made  for  a new  Insane  Hospital 
at  Cherokee,  of  $60,000  per  annum  until  the  amount  reached  $200,000. 
The  commission  appointed  to  construct  the  hospital  anticipated  the 
successive  annual  appropriations  and  entered  into  contracts  for  the 
immediate  construction  of  the  building,  the  contractors  agreeing  to 
wait  for  their  money  until  the  appropriations  became  available.  In 
January  1899  the  Treasurer  of  State  disbursed  $121,774  in  payment 
of  contracts  for  work  done  two  years  previous.  Somewhat  similar 
is  the  case  of  the  time  warrants  issued  against  the  special  University 
tax  collections.  In  1^98  the  Assembly  extended  the  special  levy  auth- 
orized for  building  purposes  one  year  to  provide  funds  for  the  pur- 
chase of  books  and  rebuilding  the  library  destroyed  by  fire.  The 
friends  of  the  University  had  striven  to  obtain  an  appropriation  at 
the  adjourned  session  of  the  26th  General  Assembly  in  1897  but  failed. 
The  tax  that  had  been  extended  was  not  due  and  collectible  until 
1902.  But  the  Act  was  so  worded  that  warrants  could  be  issued"  pay- 
able when  the  additional  levy”  should  be  collected.  This  was  done; 
and  there  are  now  outstanding  time  warrants  drawn  in  1898  against 
the  prospective  receipts  from  that  tax  to  be  paid  next  year  to  the 
amount  of  $49,000. 


27 


These  two  methods  or  devices  for  anticipating  revenue  receipts 
partake  of  the  nature  of  funding  operations  although  in  a legal  sense 
neither  the  Cherokee  contracts  nor  the  time  warrants  issued  against 
the  special  University  fund  are  bonds.  They  are  makeshifts  resort- 
ed to  frequently  for  procuring  funds  which  like  a bond  issue  supple- 
ments the  tax  levies.  So  often  were  such  contracts  resorted  to  that 
the  statutes  contain  frequent  prohibitions  of  the  practice.  In 
one  case  it  was  made  a misdemeanor.  An  excess  of  zeal  in  conserv- 
ing what  is  believed  by  the  governing  Boards  to  be  the  best  interests 
of  the  institutions  or  in  meeting  what  is  deemed  an  imperative  de- 
mand accounts  for  the  use  of  such  methods.  But  sound  finance  does 
not  sanction  such  anticipations  of  revenue.  In  neither  of  the  cases 
cited  above  did  the  legislature  contemplate  the  measures  taken.  Had 
they  been  suggested  in  open  debate  they  probably  would  have  been 
negatived.  It  is  obvious  that  if  the  legislature  is  to  exercise  control 
over  the  state  expenses  the  resort  to  such  makeshifts  should  be  ex- 
plicitly provided  for  and  recourse  to  them  otherwise  absolutely  pro- 
nibited.  It  is  natural  that  those  directly  in  charge  of  an  institution 
should  be  anxious  to  secure  funds  to  establish  or  to  increase  work 
deemed  necessary  or  highly  desirable  and  that  they  should  get  impa- 
tient with  a slow  moving  legislative  body  for  not  promptly  advancing 
the  funds.  But  it  is  vastly  more  important  that  the  legislature 
should  exercise  constant  and  complete  control  of  the  use  of  the  pub- 
lic purse  and  of  the  public  credit.  And  if  administrative  officers  or 
boards  can  by  such  procedure  as  just  referred  to  secure  funds  ahead  of 
the  time  specified  by  law,  can  contract  debts  or  obligations  payable 
out  of  future  appropriations  that  may  be  revoked,  it  is  evident  that 
legislative  control  of  the  budget  can  not  be  maintained. 

In  emereencies  where  the  support  funds  are  exhausted  and  the 
inmates  of  the  institutions  are  in  imminent  danger  of  suffering,  the 
Code  has  provided  for  the  incurring  of  an  indebtedness  to  supply  the 
urgent  needs.  But  here  definite  statutory  provision  is  made  and  the 
occasions  when  the  responsible  officers  are  compelled  to  go  in  debt 
are  so  rare  and  so  likely  to  attract  public  attention  that  the  legislature 
is  made  aware  of  the  necessity  and  the  extent  to  which  the  state  has 
been  indebted. 

The  state  has  a small  emergency  fund  called  “The  Providential 
Fund,”  which  can  be  drawn  upon  in  cases  of  losses  to  an  institution 
due  to  fire  or  storms.  In  1896  when  the  Institution  for  the  Feeble 
Minded  at  Glenwood  suffered  the  loss  of  its  main  building,  amount- 
ing in  value  to  |113,000,  the  Executive  Council  of  the  state  not  only 
appropriated  all  in  the  fund,  but  gave  its  sanction  to  the  Auditor  of 
State  issuing  and  the  Treasurer  of  State  cashing  warrants  for  $40,000 
more  than  the  law  allowed  to  provide  the  inmates  immediately  with 
the  proper  shelter.  Fortunately  for  both  officers  the  legislature  legal- 
ized the  transaction  at  its  ensuing  extra  session. 

We  have  now  noticed  all  of  the  supplementary  sources  of  revenue 
of  the  states ’s  institutions.  Taken  in  the  aggregate  they  constitute 
a very  important  part  of  the  available  assets  of  the  state  in  the  sup- 


28 


port  of  our  institutions.  Public  attention  is  seldom  directed  to  them 
and  they  are  but  little  considered  by  the  General  Assembly  when  the 
biennial  budget  is  determined,  although,  of  course,  the  income  there- 
from is  presumed  upon  and  more  or  less  reckoned  with.  But  so  far 
as  popular  discussion  goes  it  is  no  doubt  true  that  the  general  belief 
is  that  the  expense  of  the  several  institutions  is  shown  by  the  ledger 
accounts  of  the  state  treasurer  and  the  taxes  paid  by  the  citizens  in 
the  counties  toward  their  support — a belief  which  in  some  instances 
as  shown  is  very  far  from  being  true.  With  truth  it  may  be  said  that 
in  some  cases  the  appropriations  from  the  funds  of  the  state  treasury 
are  supplementary  to  the  income  derived  from  the  sources  which  I 
have  here  designated  as  supplementary. 

We  shall  later  consider  the  special  tax  levies  for  the  Agricultural 
College  and  for  the  State  University  in  discussing  the  methods  of 
making  appropriations.  Here  we  have  to  note  that  while  they  are 
specially  ordered  taxes,  they  are  in  fact  a part  of  the  general  tax  levy 
for  state  purposes  and  are  not  classifiable  as  supplementary  sources 
as  the  special  levies  for  the  care  of  the  insane,  feeble  minded,  blind 
and  orphans.  For  the  latter  the  counties  may  or  may  not  make  a spec- 
ial levy  for  the  insane  or  feeble  minded,  contingent  partly  upon 
the  presence  of  their  residents  in  those  institutions  and  partly 
upon  the  ability  of  the  counties  to  collect  the  expense  of  their 
maintenance  from  the  relatives.  In  the  case  of  the  one  tenth  mill 
levies  for  the  educational  institutions,  however,  the  taxes  are  levied 
by  the  State  Executive  Council  precisely  as  the  regular  state  levy  is 
ordered  levied  by  that  body.  It  is  not  left  to  the  discretion  of  local 
authorities.  It  is  in  reality  a part  of  the  annual  state  levy. 

To  summarize  the  sources  of  revenue  for' the  maintenance  of  Iowa’s 
State  Institutions:  The  chief  source  is  the  General  Revenue  Fund 
of  the  state.  For  some  of  the  Charitable  Institutions  special  taxes  are 
collected  from  counties  for  the  expense  of  keeping  their  residents. 
Most  of  the  institutions  under  the  Board  of  Control  and  the  Agricul- 
tural College  derive  considerable  income  from  the  productive  labor  of 
inmates  and  various  industries.  The  Educational  Institutions  obtain 
a good  deal  of  revenue  from  tuitions  and  some  from  rentals.  The 
University  and  the  Agricultural  College  receive  a large  proportion  of 
their  income  from  interest  on  endowment  funds  and  from  special  tax 
levies. 


29 


PART  III. 

METHOD  OF  MAKING  INSTITUTIONAL  APPROPRIATIONS. 

From  the  view  point  of  the  citizen  and  tax  payer  it  is  of  as  mnoh 
importance — indeed  in  these  days  it  has  come  to  be  of  greater  import- 
ance— to  know  the  manner  in  which  the  legislature  makes  appropri- 
ations of  the  funds  which  the  state  obtains  through  taxation,  the 
method  of  disbursing  monies  therefor  from  the  state’s  treasury  and 
the  conditions  or  resrulations  controlling  the  administrative  officers  in 
whose  hands  the  funds  are  placed  for  the  attainment  of  the  objects  of 
the  legislative  enactments  as  it  is  to  know  the  amount  and  frequency 
of  the  appropriations. 

Modern  democracies  have  shown  a willingness  to  sustain  enormous 
budgets  that  is  simply  astonishing  but  their  consent  thereto  rests  on 
the  assumption  that  they,  the  people,  not  only  control  the  amount  of 
the  public  expenditures  but  the  procedure  of  public  officials  in  the 
actual  use  of  the  funds  allotted  to  them.  Up  to  the  middle  of  the 
last  century  the  people  who  were  concerned  about  the  growth  of  dem- 
ocratic government  and  republican  institutions  were  interested  prim- 
arily and  for  the  most  part  in  questions  of  raising  revenue,  in  the 
control  of  the  executive  and  legislature  in  their  exactions  from  the 
tax  paying  citizens.  They  were  not  much  concerned  about  the  direc- 
tion or  method  r'r  about  the  specific  amounts  of  appropriations  or  the 
conduct  of  officials  superintending  their  expenditure.  But  the  var- 
ious and  extensive  evils  which  have  arisen  in  connection  with  the 
tremendous  increases  in  the  expenditures  of  modern  states  have  com- 
pelled a recognition  of  the  importance  of  the  methods  in  vogue  in 
making  appropriations  and  in  the  disbursement  and  application  of 
public  funds.  The  need  for  adequate  regulation  and  control  of  ex- 
penditures with  a view  to  effective  and  economical  use  of  the 
state’s  revenue  has  come  to  be  a most  pressing,  if  not  the  paramount 
question,  in  the  public  finance  of  the  American  Commonwealth,  espec- 
ially in  the  finance  of  the  states  and  municipalities.  The  corruption 
which  has  become  so  conspicuous  in  our  local  governments  and 
to  some  extent  in  our  state  governments  is  due  in  large  part  to  lax 
and  ineffective  administration  and  control  of  their  finance. 

The  great  and  increasing  preponderance  of  expenditures  for  insti- 
tutions in  American  state  budgets  which  has  come  about  in  recent 
year  as  we  have  seen  (see  Bulletin  July  1901  p 331-337)  makes  the  leg- 


so 


Islative  procedure  in  authorizing  such  outlays  and  their  control  and 
audit,  a matter  of  serious  importance.  During  the  past  twenty-five 
years  in  many  states  the  evils  resulting  from  ill  advised  appropriations 
from  mismanagement  and  from  corrupt  perversion  of  funds  to  private 
and  political  uses  have  induced  considerable  discussion  of  institu- 
tional expenditures.  And  material  advances  towards  better  regula- 
tion and  control  have  been  made.  State  Boards  of  Charities  with  ad- 
visory powers  and  privileges  of  supervision  and  audit  and  Boards  of 
Control  with  absolute  jurisdiction  in  the  administration  of  penal  re- 
formatory and  charitable  institutions,  whose  members  are  charged 
with  the  entire  responsibility  for  their  conduct,  have  in  a number  of 
states  displaced  the  numerous  seperate  Boards  of  Trustees  or  Com- 
missions. 

Prior  to  1898  there  was  practically  no  progress  made  in  Iowa 
toward  concentration  of  responsibility  for  the  management  of  state 
institutions  and  the  central  supervision  and  audit  of  institutional 
expenditures.  Executive  commissions  and  legislative  committees  be- 
ginning with  the  earliest  days  from  time  to  time  made  investigations, 
reported  cases  of  waste  of  funds,  of  mismanagement,  occasionally  of 
corruption  and  suggested  and  urged  reforms  in  the  methods  of  dis- 
bursing and  applying  institutional  funds.  But  the  improvements  urg- 
ed and  those  adopted  did  not,  except  as  noted  hereafter,  aim  at  the 
reorganization  of  the  administrative  system.  But  even  with  specific 
statutes  prohibiting  certain  practices — such  as  transfers  of  funds  or 
unused  balances,  exceeding  appropriations,  and  contracting  liabilities 
without  statutory  warrant  therefor — their  provisions  were  rendered 
nugatory  by  the  lack  of  constant,  central  supervision  of  the  affairs 
of  the  institutions.  When,  however,  the  institutions  of  the  state  began 
in  the  seventies  to  demand  more  and  more  money  to  sustain  them  and 
it  was  perceived  that  they  were  absolutely  absorbing  over  half  of 
the  total  revenues  expended  by  the  state,  the  uneconomical  character 
of  the  administrative  system  began  to  be  appreciated. 

Governor  O.  O.  Carpenter  in  1876  urged  the  adoption  of  'a  State 
Board  of  Charities  with  limited  powers.  In  1878  and  again  in  1880 
and  in  1882  Governor  Jno*.  H.  Gear  advocated  a Board  of  Control  for 
the  eleemosynary  institutions.  Governor  Buren  R.  Sherman  in  1882, 
1884  and  1886  recommended  a State  Board  of  Trustees  with  general 
powers  of  supervision  to  supplement  the  local  boards.  Governor 
Horace  Boies  in  his  messages  of  1892  and  1894  argued  strongly  for  the 
aboiution  of  the  seperate  boards  and  the  substitution  of  a single 
Board  of  Control  of  three  members.  Nothing  was  done  looking 
towards  this  reorganization  in  the  financial  administration  of  the 
institutions  until  1898  when,  as  a result  of  a searching  investigation 
by  a legislative  committee,  an  act  was  passed  creating  a Board  of 
Control  with  complete  jurisdiction  over  fourteen  eleemosynary,  re- 
formatory and  penal  institutions.  The  passage  of  the  act  marked  a 
revolution  in  the  financial  affairs  of  the  institutions  affected  and  the 
Iowa  Board  of  Control  is  one  of  the  most  important  experiments  now 
in  progress  in  American  state  finance.  Its  achievements  thus  far  in  the 


31 


attainment  of  efiaciency  in  the  conduct  of  the  several  institutions 
under  its  charge  and  of  economy  in  the  employment  of  the  state 
revenue  have  been  noteworthy.  So  much  so  that  Minnesota  has  plac- 
ed the  Iowa  law  on  her  statute  books  and  her  Board  has  adopted  with 
but  little  or  no  change  all  of  the  rules  and  regulations  and  schedules  of 
the  Iowa  Board. 

In  this  part  we  shall  deal  with  the  methods  pursued  by  the 
legislature  in  making  appropriations,  considering  the  nature  of  the 
grants,  their  method  and  duration,  the  regulations  governing  the 
disbursement  of  funds  from  the  state  treasury  to  the  local  author- 
ities of  the  institutions  and  the  provisions  relative  to  the  disposal 
of  unexpended  balance  of  appropriations.  We  shall  then  trace  the 
development  of  the  modes  of  controlling  the  institution  authorities  in 
their  use  of  the  funds  and  of  auditing  their  accounts  and  expenditures. 
Finally  we  shall  trace  the  evolution  of  legislative  supervision  and 
control  of  institutional  appropriations  and  expenditures  and  the  pro- 
cedure of  the  General  Assembly  with  respect  to  them  in  the  passage 
of  the  biennial  budget. 

( 1 ) NATURE  OF  INSTITUTIONAL  APPROPRIATIONS. 

Intelligent  public  interest  in  Institution  expenditures  and  effective 
legislative  supervision  and  control  of  such  appropriations  are  largely 
dependent  upon  the  nature  and  method  of  appropriations.  If,  when 
the  biennial  budget  is  under  consideration,  the  Finance  Committees 
of  the  General  Assembly  can  make  a clear  and  compact  statement  of 
the  nature  and  amount  of  the  established  funds  and  of  those  asked  for, 
can  present  them  in  uniform  and  classified  schedules  for  all  of  the 
various  institutions,  the  members  of  the  legislature  and  the  tax  pay- 
ing public  can  exercise  intelligent  and  effective  control  over  institu- 
tional outlays.  Otherwise  interest  will  flag ; it  will  be  unsystematic 
and  intermittent ; and  the  great  bulk  of  the  appropriations  will  be 
made  with  little  or  no  scrutiny.  Public  interest  and  legislative 
attention  will  center  in  the  grand  total  of  the  budget  and  in  special 
outlays  that  arouse  'popular  interest  rather  than  in  the  urgency  and 
propriety  of  the  large  majority  of  the  particular  expenditures  sought 
for. 

The  constitution  of  Iowa  provides  that  “no  money  shall  be  drawn 
from  the  treasury  but  in  consequence  of  appropriations  made  by  law. ' ’ 
(Art.  Ill,  Sec.  24. ) It  is  not  sufficient  compliance  with  this  consti- 
tutional provision  that  an  act  creating  an  office  or  institution  or  pro- 
viding for  any  object  requiring  revenue  declares  the  salary  attaching 
to  the  office  or  specifles  the  sum  to  be  expended  in  the  attainment  of 
the  object  of  the  act.  To  attain  the  end  sought  there  must  be  includ- 
ed in  the  act  an  obvious  and  definite  order  or  direction  to  the  financi- 
al officers  of  the  commonwealth,  the  Auditor  and  Treasurer  of  State, 
to  honor  requisitions  for  the  amount  declared  set  apart,  or  else  a sep- 
arate act  appropriating  so  much  of  the  funds  in  the  treasury  “not 
otherwise  appropriated”  for  the  specific  purpose.  The  former  has 
been  the  method  pursued  with  institutional  appropriations  as  a rule 


32 


while  with  the  state’s  pay  roll  for  the  executive  and  judicial  officers 
and  clerical  assistance  the  latter,  viz. , separate  appropriation  acts,  has 
been  the  legislative  practice. 

(A)  Confusion  in  Appropriations. 

The  General  Assembly  at  its  regular  biennial  sessions  makes  and 
sanctions  appropriations  of  state  revenue  for  institutions  approximat- 
ing 200  in  number.  For  the  institutions  under  the  Board  of  Control 
alone  the  various  appropriations  made  in  the  Act  of  1900  aggregated 
ninety  eight : and  these  were  in  addition  to  sundry  standing  appropri- 
ations previously  authorized  and  in  force.  These  appropriations  are 
of  all  sorts  and  conditions. 

There  has  never  been  any  system  pursued  by  the  legislature  of 
Iowa  in  making  appropriations  and  so  far  as  the  present  writer  can 
discover,  there  never  has  been,  aside  from  recommendations  of  various 
committees  that  have  investigated  the  subject  and  of  the  Board  of 
Control,  any  effort  to  secure  a systematic  ordering  and  classification 
in  the  preparation  of  the  institutional  accounts  when  the  budget  bills 
are  reported  for  passage.  There  prevails  the  utmost  variation  and 
confusion  as  to  terminology,  schedules,  duration  of  grants  and  the 
methods  and  conditions  of  disbursements.  Take  some  of  the  educa- 
tional institutions : the  Auditor  of  State  in  his  report  for  1899-1901 
lists  the  different  titles  of  appropriations  for  the  College  of  Agricul- 
ture ; there  are  four  for  buildings,  one  for  the  president’s  residence, 
one  for  the  General  Engineering  Hall,  one  for  a horse  barn  and  stock 
pavilion,  and  a special  tax  levy  for  buildings ; besides  these  there  is 
a fund  for  ‘ ‘ improvements  and  repairs ; ’ ’ along  . with  these  are  two 
entitled  “support  and  current  expense’’  and  “Repair,  current  ex- 
penses and  additional  support”  each  and  all  more  or  each  and  all 
more  or  less  related  and  overlapping  each  other  somewhat.  The 
Normal  School  among  others  has  one  for  “Repairs  ” one  for  “Con- 
tingent and  Repairs”  and  another  for  “Contingent  Expenses.” 

This  confusion  is  more  conspicuous  in  the  appropriations  for  the 
institutions  under  the  Board  of  Control.  As  we  have  already  seen 
when  dealing  with  the  sources  of  revenue  (Bulletin  for  July,  1901,  pp 
338-9)  the  Legislature  has  pursued  various  plans  in  providing  for  the 
support  of  some  of  the  charitable  and  reformatory  institutions.  The 
cost  of  clothing  and  transporting  inmates  of  the  Orphans  Home,  the 
Feeble  Minded  Institution  and  the  School  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  is 
charged  to  the  counties  of  their  residence  while  for  the  Reform 
Schools  these  expenses  are  made  a charge  on  the  state  treasury.  The 
cost  of  maintenance  at  the  Insane  Hospitals  is  charged  to  the  counties 
except  as  to  state  and  private  patients.  All  of  the  institutions  but 
the  Soldiers  Home  have  special  appropriations  for  repairs  and  contin- 
gent expenses.  For  all  of  the  institutions  with  exception  of  the 
College  for  the  Blind  and  the  School  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  there 
are  appropriations  for  “support”  computed  at  so  much  per  capita 
per  month  or  per  quarter  as  the  case  may  be.  With  all  or  nearly  all 
these  appropriations  the  payrolls  are  met  out  of  the  per  capita  allow- 
ances ; but  with  the  institutions  excepted  above  there  are  special 


33 


annual  appropriations  for  salaries.  Before  its  abandonment  in  1900 
there  were  special  appropriations  for  support,  repair  and  contingent 
expenses  of  the  Industrial  School  at  Knoxville. 

The  term  “support”  varies  considerably.  With  most  of  the  insti- 
tutions appropriations  therefor  include  all  of  the  current  or  ordinary 
outlays,  such  as  those  for  food,  clothing,  heat,  light,  repairs  and 
salaries.  But  with  some  salaries  are  excluded,  with  others  repairs. 
New  buildings  are  nearly  always  provided  for  by  special  acts.  The 
same  is  true  for  the  most  part  of  additions,  renewals  or  improve- 
ments of  any  magnitude.  For  the  University  and  the  College  of 
Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts,  however,  appropriations  have  been 
made  for  buildings  by  special  tax  levies  of  one  tenth  of  a mill  on  the 
assessable  property  in  the  counties  without  specification  or  limitation 
(except  as  to  the  maximum  amounts  available  and  the  duration  of 
the  grants).  With  exception  of  the  income  obtained  by  the  latter 
institution  from  the  national  government  under  the  Morrill  Act  the 
revenue  received  from  the  two  endowment  funds  of  the  two  education- 
al institutions,  just  mentioned,  may  be  used  for  “current  expenses” 
a term  of  sufficient  elasticity  to  permit  a multitude  of  various  outlays. 

This  confusing  variation  in  the  content  of  appropriation  terms  in 
legislative  acts  was  productive  of  much  evil  in  the  days  prior  to  the 
creation  of  the  Board  of  Control.  Not  only  did  this  lack  of  uniformity 
induce  perplexity  and  confusion  in  keeping  the  accounts,  rendering 
impossible,  or  very  difficult,  intelligible  balance  sheets,  it  encourag- 
ed and  actually  produced  lax  administration  of  funds  and  disregard 
of  statutory  provisions  limiting  the  uses  of  appropriations.  Support 
funds  were  frequently  disbursed  for  pay  rolls  contrary  to  law  and 
contingent  and  repair  funds  were  drawn  upon  for  support.  The. 
Healey  committee  in  1898  in  their  report  point  out  numerous  instances 
of  such  perversions  of  funds  and  condemn  the  practice  in  strong  terms. 
(See  Report  pp  7,  15,  24-25,  28,  41-42,  66).  As  we  shall  see  later  m. 
considering  the  matter  of  legislative  control  of  institutional  outlays 
these  evils  naturally  resulted  from  the  hap-hazard  way  in  which 
institutions  were  created  and  provided  for  by  the  legislature.  There 
was  no  systematic  consideration  of  appropriations  for  institutions  in 
the  preparation  and  passage  of  the  budget.  Governing  boards  and  the 
officials  of  institutions  instead  of  being  regarded  simply  as  administra- 
tive agents  of  the  Assembly  in  carrying  out  a continuous  and  consist- 
ent state  policy,  came  to  regard  themselves  as  the  representatives  of 
special  interests  who  looked  after  the  acquisition  of  public  funds  for 
their  several  institutions  with  little  or  no  regard  to  uniformity  in  out- 
lays or  to  the  general  public  interests.  While  there  has  been  a very 
marked  improvement  in  this  respect  since  the  act  of  1898  the  system 
of  approfjriations  has  not  been  changed.  It  contains  many  absurdities 
and  inconsistencies.  In  the  language  of  the  Board  of  Control,  after 
nearly  two  years  of  practical  experience  under  the  statutes,  “The 
present  system  in  the  method  of  making  appropriations  is  unbusiness, 
like  and  has  nothing  to  commend  it.  ” (Report  for  1899  p 32).  And 
unless  the  legislature  alters  its  practice  in  these  matters  it  is  not  un- 


34 


likely  that  in  years  to  come  when  public  interest  in  the  expenditures 
for  institutions  is  not  so  keen  as  now  and  the  personnel  of  the  Board 
of  Control  is  changed  and  there  is  not  that  constant  effort  and  alert- 
ness to  conserve  both  law  and  the  welfare  of  the  institutions  the  evils 
of  former  days  will  recur. 

(B)  Classes  of  Appropriations. 

The  only  classification  of  our  legislative  appropriations  that  will 
comprehend  all  now  made  for  institutions  is  the  division  into  two 
classes — the  Standing  or  permanent  appropriations,  and  the  Extra- 
ordinary or  special  appropriations  with  the  secondary  division  of 
each  class  into  Specific  and  Contingent  Appropriations. 

Standing  appropriations,  as  their  name  indicates,  are  continuously 
in  force  from  the  time  of  enactment  until  modified  or  repealed  by 
the  General  Assembly.  They  authorize,  in  the  main,  expenditures 
for  the  regular  support  or  maintenance  after  an  institution  has  been 
established  and  the  buildings  or  the  necessary  preliminary  outlays 
have  been  made.  Thus,  they  provide  for  the  heating,  lighting,  ven- 
tilation and  drainage  of  the  buildings,  the  salaries  of  employees  and 
the  provisioning  and  clothing  of  inmates  and  medical  stores.  In  a 
word  Standing  appropriations  as  a rule  provide  for  ordinary  expenses 
and  current  needs. 

Extraordinary  or  special  appropriations  as  the  term  is  used  in  the 
parlance  of  our  financial  reports  and  legislative  estimates  are  those 
allotments  of  state  funds  made  at  each  session  of  the  legislature  ex- 
clusive of,  and  in  addition  to,  the  Standing  appropriations.  They 
authorize  specific  amounts  expended  for  particular  purposes ; the 
expenditure  may  or  may  not  be  limited  as  to  the  time  in  which  it 
shall  be  made ; and  the  actual  amounts  to  be  disbursed  may  or  may 
not  be  contingent  on  circumstances  or  conditions.  Thus  defined,  it 
is  apparent  that  an  extraordinary  appropriation  may  of  itself  create  a 
regular  or  standing  appropriation.  Moreover,  it  may,  and  frequently, 
it  does  occur  that  the  object  for  which  an  appropriation  is  made  can 
not  be  attained  within  the  life  of  the  Assembly  authorizing  the  appro- 
priation, viz. , within  two  years,  and  what  is  an  extraordinary  appro- 
priation for  the  existing  legislature  becomes  a quasi  standing  appro- 
priation in  the  contemplation  of  the  succeeding  Assembly.  Extraor- 
dinary appropriations  usually  relate  to  the  initial  expenditures  in  the 
founding  of  institutions : they  provide  for  new  buildings,  the  salaries 
of  new  officials,  for  repairs,  renewals  and  improvements  where  they 
are  of  some  magnitude. 

Appropriations  of  either  class  are  either  “Specific”  or  “Contin- 
gent” as  to  the  amount  that  can  be  expended.  The  Specific  appropri- 
ation sets  apart  a definite  maximum  sum,  frequently  with  the  clause 
added,  “or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary.  ’ ’ Excepting  those 
for  support  and  current  expenses  the  bulk  of  the  appropriations  for 
the  institutions  are  specific.  An  appropriation  is  contingent  when 
the  total  amount  that  may  be  disbursed  from  the  treasury  under  the 
act  is  dependant  upon  certain  conditions  precedent  to  expenditure 
which  if  they  exist  or  come  about  authorize  and  permit  the  disburse 


ment  of  money  from  the  state  treasury.  Thus  in  the  Act  of  January  16 
1849  providing  for  the  establishment  of  three  Normal  Schools  the  ap- 
propriation of  $500  for  each  was  contingent  on  the  subscription  of  a 
like  sum  by  private  parties  for  the  erection  of  buildings.  In  found- 
ing the  Asylum  for  the  Blind  at  Vinton,  the  appropriation  was  made 
conditional  on  the  citizens  of  that  community  raising  $5,000,  exclus- 
ive of  lands,  (ch.  125  laws  1858).  A part  of  the  appropriation  for 
the  Normal  School  in  1896  was  dependent  on  the  action  of  the  city 
of  Cedar  Falls  (ch.  137,  26  G.  A. ) 

There  are  two  classes  of  contingent  appropriations  that  appear 
regularly  in  the  budgets  of  Iowa:  (1.)  Those  where  the  amount  of 
the  appropriation  depends  upon,  or  equals  the  proceeds  of  a certain 
tax  or  taxes ; and  (2. ) Those  where  the  rate,  or  unit,  of  expenditure 
is  specified  but  the  aggregate  outlay  depends  upon  the  total  number 
of  persons  or  institutions  complying  with  the  conditions  of  the  appro- 
priation and  demanding  the  allowance  thereunder.  The  appropria- 
tions for  building  purposes  at  the  State  University  and  at  the  College 
of  Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts  are  examples  of  the  former  class ; 
these  consist  of  the  proceeds  of  special  tax  levies  of  one  tenth  mill 
on  the  assessable  property  of  the  counties  up  to  $55,000;  receipts  in 
excess  of  that  amount  are  covered  into  the  General  Revenue  fund  of 
the  state.  The  appropriation  of  $50  each  for  Farmers’  and  Teacher’s 
Institutes  that  may  be  organized  within  the  counties  is  an  example  of 
the  second  class.  For  most  of  the  institutions  under  the  Board  of 
Control  the  aopropriations  for  their  support,  are.  contingent,  being 
usually  so  much  per  capita ; prior  to  the  Act  of  1898  the  amount 
drawn  was  computed  partly  from  the  average  monthly  and  partly 
from  the  quarterly  attendance  but  since  that  Act  the  estimates  have 
been  made  each  month.  For  these  same  institutions  with  the  excep- 
tions of  the  Orphan’s  Home  there  have  been  specific  annual  appropri- 
ation for  salaries  of  officers  and  other  current  expenses  in  addition 
to  the  per  capita  allowances  for  support. 

(0)  Special  Tax  Levies. 

There  has  developed  of  late  years  a strong  tendency  towards  the 
policy  of  apportioning  special  taxes  or  levies  for  the  maintenance  of 
particular  institutions.  The  acquisition  of  a special  levy  by  the 
University  in  1896  gave  the  impetus  to  this  movement.  In  1897  and 
during  the  legislative  session  of  1898  it  was  suggested  and  to  some 
extent  advocated,  by  friends  of  the  University  that  the  proceeds  of 
the  state  tax  on  Collateral  Inheritances  be  set  apart  for  the  exclusive 
use  of  the  University;  the  returns  from  this  tax  will  now  approx- 
imate $100,000  annually ; but  no  serious  efforts  were  made  to 
secure  the  grant.  The  apportionment  of  a special  tax  to  the  Univers- 
ity naturally  aroused  the  authorities  and  friends  of  the  other  institu- 
tions to  seek  similar  grants  which  as  we  have  seen  the  College  of 
Agriculture  succeeded  in  securing  in  1900.  The  Board  of  Control  in 
their  first  report  in  1899  (p  32)  advocated  a general  levy  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  institutions  of  which  they  have  charge ; it  is  urged, 
however,  mainly,  as  a substitute  for  the  numerous  special  county 


36 


levies  which  are  now  assessed  for  most  of  the  charitable  institutions 
which  have  lead  to  various  undesirable  results.  (See  Bulletin  July, 
1901  pp  338-9).  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  later  special  levies  are, 
as  it  were  collections  on  account,  namely,  levies  made  for  the  pay- 
ment of  bills  rendered  against  the  counties.  These  levies  the  Board 
of  Control  would  do  away  with  and  provide  for  all  institutional  ex- 
penditures by  means  of  one  consolidated  levy. 

The  first  instance  of  the  resort  to  a special  tax  levy  as  the  form  of 
an  appropriation  for  the  maintennce  of  an  institution  was  in  1866 
when  one  eighth  of  a mill  was  included  in  the  state  rate  for  the 
Orphans  Homes  (there  were  then  three).  Ten  years  later  Governor 
C.  O.  Carpenter  in  his  last  message  advocated  a “special  levy  of  say 
one  tenth  or  one  fifteenth  of  a mill  on  a dollar  as  a permanent  fund 
for  the  University. ’’  His  reasons  for  urging  this  form  of  appropri- 
ations are  interesting. 

“This  levy  would  not  at  first  produce  so  much  as  the  usual  special 
appropriations,  but  it  would  increase  with  the  wealth  of  th^  state  and 
with  the  growing  demands  of  the  institution.  And  above  all  it  would 
enable  the  regents  to  conform  their  expenditures  to  a fixed  income 
and  relieve  them  from  coming  before  each  legislature  in  the  unwel- 
come character  of  lobbyists.  (Message  1876  p 15). 

Governor  Carpenter’s  anticipations  have  not  been  fully  realized  as 
we  shall  learn  when  considering  the  growth  of  permanent  appropri- 
ations. 

Besides  the  desire  for  fixity  and  definiteness  of  income  there  may 
be  discerned  another  reason  in  the  advocacy  of  special  levies  for  the 
educational  institutions  although  for  obvious  reasons  it  is  not  much 
dwelt  upon.  A tax  levy  thus  set  apart  is  expressed  in  rates  or  per- 
centages of  assessments  and  it  is  not  so  likely  to  attract  popular 
attention  and  arouse  discussion  and  opposition  such  as  would  perhaps 
result  if  the  sum  which  it  is  expected  the  levy  would  realize  is  speci- 
fically appropriated. 

Considered  from  the  standpoint  of  general  public  policy  and  of 
legislative  control  of  the  budgets  the  practice  of  apportioning  special 
levies  to  particular  institutions  is  of  very  doubtful  advisability. 
The  general  objections  will  be  given  in  a later  connection  when  the 
duration  of  appropriations  is  dealt  with.  Here  I shall  refer  only  to 
certain  administrative  objections.  The  strong  tendency  to  multiply 
special  levies  is  already  apparent.  One  institution  and  then  another 
secures  them.  This  encourages  others  to  seek  them.  The  pressure  on 
the  legislature  on  the  part  of  representatives  and  friends  of  special 
interests  becomes  more  and  more  persistent  and  effective  as  the  years 
increase.  The  result  is  that  the  book  keeping  of  the  state  and  of  the 
counties  becomes  loaded  with  a miscellaneous  assortment  of  accounts 
that  are  perplexing,  to  say  the  least,  and  productive  of  much  un- 
hecessary  labor  in  accounting  for  the  levies,  receipts,  delinquencies 
and  disbursements  of  the  several  funds. 

At  the  present  time  county  officials  in  addition  to  their  work  of 
accounting  for  a multitude  of  local  levies  are  compelled  to  open 


87 


accounts  with  eight  different  levies  for  state  institutions  besides  the 
general  “ state  levy”  as  it  is  called.  With  each  of  these  several  levies 
both  state  and  county  officials  must  differentiate,  and  so  exhibit  on 
their  books,  the  receipts  from  the  separate  levies  of  successive  years ; 
they  must  also  show  the  amount  of  tax  delinquent  for  each  year  to- 
gether with  the  amount  of  interest  or  penalty  due  on  account  of  such 
delinquency.  The  levies  for  the  charitable  institutions  are,  as  we 
have  seen,  not  exactly  like  those  for  the  educational  institutions. 
They  are  assessed  for  the  payment  of  bills  rendered  or  that  may  be 
rendered  by  the  institutions  against  the  counties  for  expenses  incident 
to  the  care  oi  their  defective  or  dependent  inhabitants.  A county 
may  collect  a part  or  all  of  these  accounts  from  the  relatives  of  their 
residents  in  the  institutions.  Or  it  may  raise  the  account  by  special 
levy  and  then  collect  as  much  from  such  relatives  as  can  be  collected. 
Besides  this  array  of  accounts  the  auditor  of  State  and  the  county 
auditors  and  treasurers  must  open  accounts  with  the  several  institu- 
tions that  have  claims  against  counties  for  clothing  or  transporting 
or  keeping  their  insane  or  defective  residents. 

With  special  levies  for  the  educational  institutions  there  is  an 
additional  cause  of  confusion  in  the  limitation  of  these  appropriations 
to  $55,000  of  each  levy.  When  the  returns  from  a levy  exceed  this 
amount,  the  excess  is  to  be  covered  into  the  General  Revenue  Fund 
of  the  State.  But  the  Auditor  and  Treasurer  of  State  cannot  deter- 
mine for  one,  two,  or  more  years  whether  the  levy  will  ultimately 
produce  the  maximum  amount  allowed  the  institutions  because  of 
delinquent  taxes ; and  where  the  levy  does  produce  the  first  year  the 
fuU  amount  available  it  is  just  as  necessary  thereafter  to  scrutinize 
the  returns  as  to  separate  and  apportion  the  excess  payments  to  the 
various  levies.  Final  adjustment  of  these  accounts,  even  if  the  present 
levies  are  not  renewed,  will  be  impossible  for  several  years  after  the 
expiration  of  the  grants. 

It  is  perhaps  superfluous  to  observe  that  such  a net  work  of  inter- 
locking levies  and  accounts  ncakes  the  state  bookkeeping  a confusing 
undertaking  and  renders  it  next  to  impossible  for  the  financial  officers 
to  furnish  the  Financial  Committees  of  the  legislature  with  clear 
and  concise  statements  of  such  receipts  when  the  budget  estimates 
are  up  for  discussion.  The  present  system  of  appropriations  by  special 
levies  with  its  manifest  tendencies  has  nothing  to  commend  it  from 
an  administrative  point  of  view.  It  offends  seriously  against  one  of 
the  chief  canons  of  sound  public  finance  that  demands  simplicity  in 
the  sources  of  supply  and  a system  of  accounting  therefor  that  insures 
facility  in  the  casting  up  of  receipts  and  in  the  forecasting  of  future 
income.  The  condemnation  of  the  existing  system  by  the  Board  of 
Control,  so  far  as  it  affects  the  institutions  within  their  jurisdiction, 
is  emphatic  and  unqualified.  (See  Report  for  1899  pp  30-34).  Their 
recommendation  urging  the  entire  abolution  of  the  various  special 
levies  and  the  substitution  of  a single  levy  or  the  uniform  provisions 
for  all  institutions  out  of  the  General  Revenue  fund  of  the  state  must 
needs  meet  with  approval  from  all  who  hare  had  any  praotloal  ex- 


38 


perienoe  with  this  phase  of  our  state  finances  or  who  will  investigate 
the  practical  workings  of  the  present  system  of  special  levies.  The 
general  objections  to  all  such  special  levies  will  be  considered  later 
in  dealing  with  the  policy  of  permanent  condition  of  appropriations. 

In  making  anpropriations  of  revenue  for  institutions  the  legislature 
of  Iowa  has  broadly  speaking,  pursued  one  of  two  courses  with  re- 
spect to  specifications  as  to  the  manner  in  which  funds  granted  shall 
be  utilized  or  the  uses  to  which  they  shall  be  devoted.  They  have 
been  made  either  in  gross,  viz.  in  lump  sums,  with  out  detailed  direc- 
tions respecting  the  manner  and  particulars  of  expenditure — (the  main 
object  is  of  course  stated  or  known,  but  the  statutes  leaving  wholly  to 
the  discretion  of  executive  officers  or  governing  Board  the  control  of 
the  outlay)  or  they  have  been  drawn  with  many  limitations  as  to  the 
manner  of  expenditure  and  the  particular  purposes  for  which  the 
money  is  to  be  expended>re  specified. 

In  the  earlier  fiscal  periods  institutional  appropriations  were  very 
general  in  character.  The  application  of  the  funds  was  left  almost 
entirely  to  those  in  charge  of  an  institution.  The  acts  indicated  the 
general  object  or  purpose  to  be  accomplished  and  money  sufficient  to 
attain  it  was  appropriated.  The  character  of  the  buildings  to  be 
constructed,  the  amounts  to  be  expended  for  the  various  structures 
for  heating,  lighting,  ventilation,  drainage,  were  left  to  the  discretion 
of  the  Boards  or  commissions  immediately  in  charge  of  the  institut- 
ions. The  amounts  „to  be  paid  for  salaries,  rentals,  apparatus,  were 
likewise  left  to  the  discretion  and  judgment  of  governing  boards  for 
allotment.  The  salaries  of  the  chief  officers  of  some  of  the  institu- 
tions were  occasionally  specified  as  at  the  Penitentiary  but  in  gener- 
al they  were  not.  In  a short  time  the  appropriations  become  more 
specific  as  to  details.  The  exact  amount  to  be  expended  on  a partic- 
ular building,  or  on  a roof  of  that  building  or  for  boiler  room  is  set 
out.  • 

Two  explanations  for  this  change  in  method  of  appropriation  may 
be  given : One  that  the  reports  of  mis-use  of  appropriations  at  some 
of  the  institutions  caused  the  legislature  to  make  specific  funds  in 
order  to  secure  stricter  accounting,  and  the  other  is  that  the  heads  of 
the  institutions  and  the  trustees  in  their  efforts  to  obtain  liberal 
appropriations  could  secure  more  if  they  asked  for  divers  small  sums 
for  specific  purposes  than  if  they  asked  for  the  aggregate  amount 
to  be  expended  at  their  discretion. 

Standing  appropriations  for  support  and  current  expenses,  almost 
without  exception  have  been  made  in  gross  without  specifications 
as  to  apportionment.  The  salary,  schedules,  dietary  and  the  various 
departments  of  an  institution  have  received  such  allotments  of  the 
funds  as  those  in  charge  determined  to  be  proper.  Extraordinary 
appropriations  have  been,  as  a rule,  specific  with  respect  to  amounts 
to,be  expended  for  particular  objects.  The  legislative  practice  as  re- 
gards the  latter  class,  however,  has  been  far  from  consistent.  The 
Healey  committee  in  their  Report  in  1898  call  attention  to  the  evils 
growing  out  of  what  they  term  “looseness”  in  drafting  appropriation 


39 


acts.  They  show  that  the  failure  to  limit  the  appropriations  to  specific 
purposes  gave  a latitude  to  the  institution  authorities  that  was  not 
always  properly  used.  (See  Report  pp  12  and  49. ) The  appropriations 
for  buildings  at  the  two  Educational  institutions  at  Ames  and  Iowa 
City  are  given  continuously  for  five  years  without  specification  of  any 
kind.  The  Board  of  Control  urges  that  the  appropriations  for  all  of 
the  expenses  of  maintenance  of  all  the  institutions  under  its  charge 
be  consolidated  into  one  general  appropriation  and  that  the  Board 
be  given  power  to  apportion  the  funds  among  the  institutions  as  the 
members  deem  best.  (See  Report  1899  p 32. ) 

The  arguments  for  and  against  the  policy  of  granting  executive 
officers  or  Boards  absolute  discretion  in  the  apportionment  of  funds 
under  appropriations  made  in  lump  are  of  almost  equal  weight.  It 
is  no  doubt  true  that  we  cannot  secure  efficiency  and  accountability 
in  the  conduct  of  the  business  of  government  unless  we  concentrate 
responsibility  and  allow  those  charged  with  it  the  largest  latitude 
for  the  exercise  of  judgment.  But  financial  experience  of  American 
states  and  cities  just  as  certainly  teaches  that  absolute  power  is  dan- 
gerous. Too  great  discretion  allowed  in  the  disposition  of  public 
revenue  tends  to  induce  arbitrary  use  of  such  power  and  to  encourage 
disregard  of  the  public  interests.  The  growth  of  constitutional  gov- 
ernment has  been  characterized  by  the  development  of  budgets  in 
which  expenditures  have  been  more  and  more  particularized  in  order 
to  secure  accountability  for  perversion  or  mismanagement  of  funds. 
The  experience  of  Iowa  clearly  indicates  the  dangerous  tendencies  of 
unlimited  discretion  in  expenditures  for  institutions.  The  fact  that 
there  exists  now  a remarkable  popular  confidence  in  the  present 
Board  of  Control  that  its  menbers  will  conserve  all  interests  in  their 
actions  does  not  of  itself  justify  a radical  departure  from  our  gen- 
eral practice  of  specializing  funds  so  far  as  practicable.  If  the  legis- 
lature scrutinized  the  expenditures  for  institutions  more  thorougnly 
and  systematically  than  has  heretofore  been  done  the  advisability  of 
the  change  urged  would  be  more  pronounced, 

(3)  LIMITATIONS  AS  TO  DISBURSEMENTS. 

In  providing  for  the  needs  of  the  state  the  legislature  must  see  to 
it  that  revenues  flow  into  the  treasury  in  sufficient  quantities  to  sup- 
ply the  demands.  In  forcasting  the  condition  of  the  treasury  during 
the  budget  period  and  its  ability  to  meet  all  demands,  it  is  necessary 
to  know  the  limitations  in  the  appropriation  acts  as  to  the  times  for 
disbursements  of  the  funds.  Can  those  entitled  to  the  appropriations 
demand  them  monthly,  quarterly  or  semi  annually?  Or  can  the  entire 
amount  be  drawn  at  once? 

But  it  is  not  merely  in  connection  with  successful  management  of 
the  treasury  that  limitations  representing  disbursements  of  rev- 
enue under  appropriations  are  important.  It  is  a part  of  a sound 
fiscal  policy  that  no  money  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  treasury  to 
those  superintending  the  expenditure  of  appropriations  for  public 
works  or  institutions  until  the  funds  are  actually  needed  for  the 


40 


carrying  on  of  such  work  or  institutions.  For  revenue  to  be  drawn 
much  prior  to  the  time  it  is  needed  only  to  lie  idle  in  the  hands  of 
officers  or  local  authorities  is  undesirable  for  various  reasons.  Such  a 
practice  obviously  increases  the  embarrassment  of  the  treasury  when 
funds  are  deficient  and  it  tends  to  misuse  of  appropriations  bec5ause 
private  parties,  especially  local  banks,  are  benefited  by  securing  the 
custody  of  such  idle  funds. 

Up  until  the  enactment  of  the  law  of  1898  creating  the  Board  of 
Control  there  never  was  any  system  or  uniformity  in  the  statutory 
provisions  regarding  the  times  for  disbursing  the  funds  appropriated 
for  institutions  to  the  officers  or  commissions  in  charge.  There  was 
a general  act  passed  in  1890  but  there  were  so  many  exceptions  made 
in  subsequent  acts  and  in  practice  so  little  attention  was  paid  to  its 
restrictions  that  it  did  not  bring  about  uniformity  in  the  matter  of 
disbursements. 

The  First  General  Assembly  in  1847  in  authorizing  the  bond  issue 
for  the  penitentiary  directed  the  Auditor  of  the  School  Fund  to  pay 
the  agent  appointed  by  the  Assembly  to  look  after  the  affairs  of  that 
institution  |5000  on  demand ; but  the  agent  was  limited  so  that  he  could 
not  have  more  than  that  sum  in  his  hands  at  any  one  time.  (ch.  0. 
I. , 1 G.  A. ).  The  act  of  1853  creating  the  Blind  Asylum  at  Iowa  City 
stated  no  time  or  method  for  disbursing  the  funds,  (oh.  26,  4 G.A. ) 
The  act  establishing  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  institution  at  Iowa  City 
simply  directed  the  Treasurer  of  State  to  pay  the  appropriation  ($5,000) 
over  to  the  trustees  (ch  87,  5 G.  A. ) In  1855  it  was  provided  that 
appropriations,  thereafter,  for  the  penitentiary  should  ba  drawn  by 
the  warden  semi-annually, — April  1,  and  October  1— -probably  in  ad- 
yance.  (ch.*96,5  G.  A.)  But  at  the  succeeding  session  the  legisla- 
ture appropriated  $20,000  and  the  whole  amount  was  payable  at  “any 
time.”  (ch.  46,  5G.  A.  Ex.  Ses. ) 

Beginning  with  1858  we  obserye  more  restrictions  placed  about  the 
disbursement  of  reyenues  from  the  state  treasury  to  meet  appropria- 
tions. Thus  the  appropriations  for  the  Insane  Hospital  at  Mt. 
Pleasant  could  only  be  drawn  upon  “montftly  estimates”  of  the 
amount  required  (ch  23,  7th  G.  A. ) ; those  for  the  Penitentiary  (ch  53 
Ib. ) apd  for  the  Uniyersity  only  “as  needed.”  Warrants  could  not  be 
issued  against  appropriations  for  the  Blind  Asylum  by  the  Auditor  of 
State  “except  for  expenditures  actually  incurred  (oh  125,  7 G.A. ) The 
act  proyiding  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  institution  prohibits  disburse- 
ments from  the  state  treasury  “ faster  than  is  actually  necessary  for  the 
maintenance”  (ch  137,  7 G.A.)  In  1860,  howeyer,  the  appropriation  for 
that  institution  was  made  payable  quarterly  “in  advance”  (ch  32,  8 
G.A.)  In  the  case  of  the  Penitentiary  the  pay  roll  of  the  guards 
was  paid  monthly  while  the  salaries  of  the  warden,  deputy,  clerk  and 
chaplain  were  paid  quarterly  (Revision  of  1860  section  5190-93).  In  1864 
the  appropriation  for  the  Blind  Asylum  was  drawable  “only  upon  es- 
timates made  monthly  as  the  work  progresses”  (oh  55,  10  G.  A.)  The 
funds  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  institution  were  issuable  quarterly  (ch 
64  Ib. ) and  those  for  the  Insane  Hospital  could  only  be  drawn 


41 


“upon  estimates  made  during  the  progress  of  the  work.  ” (ch  63,  Ib. ) 
The  trustees  of  the  University  could  draw  the  appropriation  allotted 
them  when  “required”  with  no  limitation  as  to  the  amount  (ch  73  Ib) 
The  provisions  regarding  disbursements  continued  thus  to  vary  up  un- 
til 1898. 

In  the  construction  of  the  Hospital  at  Independence  the  commis- 
sioners were  permitted  by  the  act  of  1870  to  draw  the  appropriation, 
“from  time  to  time”  in  sums  not  exceeding  815,000 — a restriction  not 
so  restraining  as  was  intended,  (ch  130  13  G.  A. ) An  appropriation  for 
the  University  of  835,000  for  two  years  was  made  payable”  one  half  an- 
nually.” (ch  36).  In  1870  the  treasurers  of  Insane  Hospitals  were  auth- 
orized to  draw  from  their  per  capita  allowance  “a  sufficient  amount 
from  time  to  time  for  the  purpose  of  defraying  any  deficiencies”  that 
might  occur  in  their  management  (ch  109,  13  G.A. ) In  1878  the  draw- 
ings were  made  at  the  end  of  the  quarters  (ch  100,  17  G.A. ) and  so 
continued  up  to  1896  when  they  were  drawn  “in  advance.”  (ch  56,  36 
G.  A. ) This  change  was  urged  on  the  ground  that  the  institutions 
could  save  money  if  they  could  pay  cash  on  large  purchases.  The 
Healey  committee  found  that  the  local  banks  holding  institution  bal- 
ances obtained  the  chief  benefit  of  the  change  in  the  time  for  distribu- 
tion. (see  Report  pp  7,  8,  10  and  14. ) This  provision  for  payments  “in 
advance”  caused  very  material  embarrassment  to  the  state  treasury 
in  1896  for  there  were  crowded  into  that  year  five  quarterly  drawings. 
At  the  time  the  state  was  short  of  funds.  There  was  a deficit  on  Jan- 
uary 1,  1897  of  8397,073  of  which  $107,831  represented  the  advance  made 
the  Hospitals. 

In  order  to  prevent  the  embarrassment  of  the  state  treasury  the  leg- 
islature during  the  eighties  and  nineties  was  accustomed  to  distribute 
appropriations  over  the  ensuing  fiscal  period  limiting  the  amount 
to  be  drawn  before  certain  dates.  The  institution  authorities  could 
draw  say  but  one  half  or  one  fourth  before  the  end  of  the  first  six 
months,  another  fourtn  in  the  next  six  months  and  so  on.  In  few 
cases  did  the  acts  specify  what  objects  under  the  appropriation  should 
be  pushed  forward  where  postponement  was  undesirable  and  what 
should  be  delayed  where  compliance  with  the  limitations  compelled 
discrimation  (oh  93  and  107,  19  G.  A.,  ch  113,  30  G.  A.  and  ch  138,  36 
G.  A.)  An  appropriation  of  $47,000  for  the  University  in  1876  was 
authorized  drawn  in  “eight  equal  quarterly  installments”  “as  the 
money  in  the  state  treasury  will  allow”  (ch  168  16  G.  A.)  The  re- 
striction sought  by  the  latter  clause  was  set  aside  by  the  Supreme 
Court  and  the  Auditor  was  required  to  issue  warrants  regardless  of 
the  condition  of  the  treasury  (see  State  vs  Snerman  46  lowa^Reports  p 
415. ) The  endowment  fund  provided  for  the  University  in  1878  was  is- 
suable only  in  the  sums  of  $5,000  quarterly  (ch  76,  17  G.  A.)  and  the 
appropriation  of  $40,000  for  buildings  at  the  school  for  the  Deaf  and 
Dumb  was  restricted  to  $5,000  during  the  ensuing  year,  (ch  136  Ib. ) 

In  1894  the  legislature  sanctioned  the  resort  to  time  warrants 
payable  on  or  after  April  15,  1895  in  order  to  permit  the  immediate 
construction  in  1894  of  buildings  at  Olarinda,  Glenwood,  Ames,  Iowa 


42 


Falls  and  Iowa  City  so  that  the  treasury  would  not  be  embarrassed 
by  the  presentation  of  the  warrants,  (ch.  133,  140,  145,  148,  and  152, 
25  G.  A. ) 

The  lack  of  system  in  the  disbursement  of  funds  for  the  several  in- 
stitutions and  the  tendency  of  boards  to  permit  the  funds  to  be  drawn 
before  they  were  needed  evidently  impressed  the  legislature  in  1890 
for  an  act  was  passed  prohibiting  the  payment  of  any  appropriation 
“until  the  same  is  needed  for  use  within  thirty  days  from  the  date  of 
the  requisition.”  (ch,  31,  23  G.  A.)  But  the  General  Assembly  itself 
ignored  its  own  enactment  and  the  Healey  committee  in  1898  reported 
that  ‘ ‘ This  act  has  not  been  observed  by  many  of  the  state  institutions.  ’ ’ 
(Report  p 13. ) When  the  Board  of  (Control  took  charge  of  the  institu- 
tions a complete  change  took  place. 

All  disbursements  from  the  treasury  for  institutions  are  now  made 
monthly.  The  heads  of  the  institutions  estimate  the  amount  of  their 
expenses  for  an  ensuing  month  which  is  approved  or  modified  by  the 
Board.  The  expenditures  are  then  made.  When  the  bills  are  rendered 
they  are  forwarded  to  the  Board  and  audited  and  the  amount  and  the 
parties  entitled  to  payment  are  certified  to  the  Auditor  and  Treasurer 
of  State  by  whom  they  are  paid.  (ch.  118  Acts  28  G.  A. ) Under  exist- 
ing law  no  money  is  paid  out  of  the  treasury  for  the  eleemosynary,  re- 
formatory and  penal  institutions  except  for  goods  or  service  actually 
obtained  by  the  institutions.  The  operations  of  the  state  treasury  have 
attained  to  regularity  that  never  before  characterized  them.  The 
financial  officers  of  the  state  can  much  more  readily  forecast  the  con- 
dition of  the  treasury. 

(4)  DURATION  OF  INSTITUTIONAL  APPROPRIATIONS. 

There  is  not  in  Iowa,  as  is  the  case  in  some  states,  e.  g.  in  Ohio,  a 
constitutional  limitation  of  the  power  of  the  legislature  with  re- 
gard to  the  duration  of  appropriations.  The  General  Assembly  can 
authorize  expenditures  for  one  year  or  for  twenty  years.  Succeeding 
Assemblies  could  annul  or  materially  modify  such  appropriations  un- 
less the  constitutional  prohibition  against  the  impairment  of  con- 
tracts that  might  be  entered  into  in  pursuance  thereof  should  serve  as 
a bar;  but  otherwise  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  the  General  Assembly 
making  perpetual  grants  of  funds  from  the  state  treasury.  This  is  the 
view  that  the  legislature  of  Iowa  has  always  taken  of  its  powers  as 
the  growth  of  what  are  known  as  “standing”  or  permanent  appropri- 
ations indicates.  As  we  shall  see  later  the  permanent  expenditures 
have  come  to  be  the  major  portion  of  the  budget. 

In  the  ordinary  course  of  the  state’s  business  and  from  the  very  ne- 
cessities of  budget  estimates,  certain  periods  have  become  established 
within  which  appropriations  begin  and  end  and  concerning  the  financial 
transactions  occurring  therein  officers  make  reports.  Some  of  these 
periods  have  been  decreed  by  statute  and  some  are  due  to  custom. 
For  the  general  expenses  of  the  government,  viz.  the  pay  rolls  of  the 
executive  and  judiciary,  the  appropriation  period  is  the  biennium  be- 
ginning with  April  1 of  the  year  of  the  le  gislative  session.  Numerous 


43 


appropriations  are  annual,  or  rather,  so  much  per  annum.  These  may 
be  reckoned  from  three  different  dates : From  April  1 ; from  July  4, 
if  the  act  takes  effect  under  the  general  law  of  the  constitution ; or 
from  October  1,  if  the  appropriation  was  authorized  by  the  code  of 
1897  which  went  into  effect  on  that  date.  The  reports  of  the  financial 
officers  of  the  state  cover  the  biennial  fiscal  period  ending  June  30, 
preceeding  the  convening  of  the  General  Assembly. 

This  variation  in  the  periods  covered  by  appropriations  and  by  the 
reports  of  expenditures  leads  to  serious  confusion  when  the  estimates 
are  made  for  the  legislature.  The  Auditor  of  State  makes  his  general 
estimates  for  an  ensuing  biennium  partly  for  the  appropriation  period 
ending  March  31  when  the  assembly  is  in  session  and  partly  for  the 
fiscal  period  ending:  June  30,  nine  months  prior  to  the  former.  The 
Board  of  Control  make  their  estimates  for  the  institutions  for  the 
regular  fiscal  period.  Both  the  public  and  the  legislature  are  likely  to 
be  confused  when  the  budget  is  up  for  discussion  as  was  illustrated 
very  clearly  in  1900.  The  committees  on  Ways  and  Means  called  on  the 
state  officers  for  their  estimates  of  income  and  outgo  for  the  next  two 
years.  The  Auditor  of  State  as  was  to  be  expected  repeated  the  esti- 
mates of  his  report.  The  Treasurer  of  State  covered  the  biennial 
fiscal  period  ending  June  30,  1901.  The  Governor’s  office  took  the  two 
calender  years  1900  and  1901.  With  such  conflicting  periods  for  esti- 
mates it  is  not  strangre  that  legislative  supervision  of  the  budget  is 
not  very  satisfactory.  Nor  is  it  strange  if  there  is  frequent  failure  to 
attain  coincidence  in  the  expenditures  and  income  of  the  state  treas- 
ury— resulting  now  in  a deficit,  now  in  a surplus. 

All  appropriations  are,  with  respect  |to  their  duration,  either  per- 
manent or  terminable.  The  latter  expire  either  at  a specified  time  or 
upon  the  fulfillment  of  certain  conditions. 

The  Standing  appropriations  by  the  terms  of  the  acts  authorizing 
them  are  permanent.  Their  provisions  continue  in  force  from  year  to 
year,  from  session  to  session  of  the  law-making  power  without  the 
recurring  necessity  of  reenactment  at  each  succeeding  session  as  is  the 
case  generally  with  appropriations.  If  the  legislature  were  to  convene 
and  adjourn  without  voting  any  appropriations  whatever  the  Standing 
appropriations  would  remain  in  full  force  and  effect.  Thus  the 
appropriations  for  support  and  salaries  for  the  institutions  under  the 
Board  of  Control  and  the  appropriations  for  the  endowment  or  income 
of  the  educational  institutions  are  permanent.  With  the  exception 
of  two  classes,  all  standing  and  all  extraordinary  appropriations  as 
well,  are  issuable  upon  funds  collected  by  the  state  by  taxation. 

The  two  classes  excepted  are : First,  the  aid  received  from  the 
United  States  for  the  use  of  the  Soldiers’  Home  under  the  act  of 
Congress,  1888 ; the  amount  depending  upon  the  appropriations  made 
by  Iowa  and  the  per  capita  attendance ; and  the  annual  sum  of 
|25, 000  >received  from  the  national  government  under  the  Morrill  act 
of  1890  for  the  promotion  of  instruction  in  Agricultural  and  Mechan- 
ical arts,  which  is  expended  at  the  institution  at  Ames.  The  second 
class  consists  of  the  proceeds  of  tne  trust  funds  given  the  state  for  the 


44 


establishment  of  the  University  and  of  the  Agricultural  College — 
known  as  their  Endowment  Funds.  The  income  derivable  from  the 
latter  class  of  appropriations  by  the  terms  of  the  original  congress- 
ional grants  is  permanently  allotted  and  cannot  be  diverted  by  the 
state  to  other  uses.  Both  of  these  classes  of  appropriations  while  a 
part  of  the  state’s  assets  and  to  be  considered  in  the  biennial  budget, 
constitute  no  drain  on  the  state  treasury  as  do  all  other  appropriations. 

Extraordinary  appropriations  are  almost  always  terminable  either 
by  specification  or  by  the  nature  of  the  object  sought  to  be  attained 
by  the  act.  Appropriations  for  the  salaries  of  officers  and  clerks  of  the 
Executive  and  Judiciary  and  for  their  contingent  or  clerical  expenses 
have  been  from  the  first  year  of  the  state  limited  to  two  years; — for 
thirty  years  and  more  this  appropriation  period  has  expired  March 
31  of  the  even  numbered  years  when  the  General  Assembly  convenes. 
All  appropriations  for  buildings,  or  improvements,  unless  otherwise 
limited,  expire  with  the  completion  of  the  building  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  the  act.  Such  appropriations  may  continue  in 
fotce  for  many  years  owing  to  various  delays  in  carrying  out  the 
provisions. 

(A)  INCREASE  OF  STANDING  OR  PERMANENT  APPROPRIATIONS 

One  of  the  most  noteworthy  developments  in  the  history  of  the 
state  finance  of  Iowa  especially  as  regards  the  institutions  of  the 
state,  is  the  growth  of  standing  appropriations.  In  the  earlier  fiscal 
periods  practically  all  appropriations  were  limited  to  the  life  of  the 
Assembly  authorizing  the  expenditure.  Permanent  appropriations 
were  very  rare  prior  to  1870.  By  the  act  of  Feb.  25,  1847  the  proceeds 
of  the  University  endowment  fund  were  turned  over  to  the  trustees  as 
a permanent  fund  and  by  the  act  of  Jan.  15,  1849  |500  was  appropriated 
annually  out  of  that  fund  for  each  of  three  normal  schools.  But 
these  were  appropriations  of  income  from  trust  funds  that  did  not 
extract  revenue  from  the  treasury  or  press  on  the  purses  of  the  tax 
payers. 

The  first  permanent  appropriation  of  revenue  was  $50  per  annum 
for  Agricultural  societies  approved  Feb.  15,  1851.  The  second  was  the 
specific  appropriation  of  $2,000  per  annum  and  the  quarterly  allowance 
of  $35  for  the  support  of  pupils  at  the  Blind  Asylum  passed  Jan.  18, 
1853.  The  same  Assembly  made  an  annual  appropriation  of  $2,500  for 
the  Geological  Survey.  In  1855  the  state  Agricultural  Society  was 
given  annually  $1,000.  When  the  Historical  Society  was  granted  its 
first  allowance  in  1857  the  act  read  “there  is  hereby  annually  appro- 
priated until  the  legislature  shall  by  law  otherwise  direct,  ’ ’ the  sum 
of  $500.  In  1866  the  Orphans’  Homes  (there  were  then  three)  were 
provided  for  by  means  of  a special  tax  levy  of  three  eighths  of  a mill; 
the  amount  per  inmate  however  was  limited  to  $8.33.  The  institution 
for  the  Blind  was  given  $5,000  per  annum  for  “Ordinary  expenses” 
and  $40  per  quarter  for  each  pupil.  Upon  its  removal  to  Council 
Bluffs  the  School  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  received  a standing  appro- 
priation of  $8,000  per  annum^for  salaries  and  current  expenses  and  $40 


45 


quarterly  per  pupil.  In  1872  the  Hospital  for  the  Insane  at  Mt. 
Pleasant  was  given  a standing  appropriation  of  $20  per  month  for 
each  public  patient.  The  number  and  grand  total  of  the  standing 
appropriations  gradually  increased  with  the  increase  of  the  institu- 
tions and  the  continuance  of  the  custom  of  permanent  or  standing 
appropriations. 

In  recent  years  there  has  been  a marked  tendency  to  increase  this 
class  of  appropriations  for  the  educational  institutions  under  the 
designation  of  “Income  Funds.”  The  University  has  been  especially 
favored  in  this  respect.  In  1878  it  was  granted  |20,000,  anually  on 
this  account;  in  1884  |8, 000  was  added;  in  1890,  $25,000 ; in  1896, 
112,500;  in  1898  $10,000;  in  1900,  $50,000;  this  gives  the  University  an 
annual  income,  exclusive  of  all  other  extraordinary  appropriations  and 
tax  levies,  of  $125,000.  The  College  of  Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts 
was  granted  in  1894,  $18,500  annually,  for  “repairs,  general  improve- 
ments and  current  expenditures’  and  in  “aid  of  the  income  fund.” 
The  legislature  added  $25,000  to  this  fund  in  1900.  The  code  of  1897 
provided  an  “Endowment  Fund”  for  the  Normal  School  of  $17,500 
per  annum  and  a contingent  fund  of  $3,000  annually.  The  legislature 
in  1898  increased  these  sums  to  $28,500  and  to  $9,000  respectively ; and 
in  1900  there  was  added  to  the  “permanent  support  fund  of  the  school 
$16,500  for  payment  of  teachers  and  $5,000  for  contingent  expenses. 
The  total  annual  fund  available  for  Normal  Schools  now  amounts  to 
$49,000  exolasive  of  extraordinary  or  special  appropriations.  All  of 
the  institutions  under  the  Board  of  Control  have  either  specific  annual 
appropriations  or  continuous  per  capita  allowances  for  their  support 
or  maintenance.  Some  have  one  class  of  appropriations  and  some  the 
other;  some  fiave  both  kinds  of  appropriations.  The  Insane  Hospitals 
and  the  Reform  Schools  are  given  only  maximum  per  capita  ap- 
propriations. All  of  the  other  institutions  under  the  Board  received  a 
per  capita  allovfance  for  support  and  a specific  sum  annually  for  sal- 
aries or  current  expenses.  The  total  amount  of  these  standing  institu- 
tional appropriations  was  $3,022,100.  on  July  1901.  The  entire  amount 
of  permanent  appropriations  reported  by  the  auditor  on  that  date  was 
$3,118,060  out  of  a total  of  $4,341,608  authorized  at  the  time. 

Akin  to  and  in  addition  to  the  standing  appropriations  are  those 
where  the  amounts  allowed  are  spread  out  or  extended  through  a 
series  of  years.  Thus  in  1880  the  Assembly  made  an  appropriation 
for  the  Industrial  School  for  Girls  at  Mitchellville  of  $20,000,  one  half 
of  which  was  not  to  be  paid  until  1882  and  the  other  half  not  until 
1884.  The  first  appropriations  for  the  Hospital  at  Cherokee  were 
similar;  the  one  made  in  1894  was  available  in  installments  of  $50,000 
per  annum  for  four  vears,  and  in  addition  the  Act  of  1896  made  $25,000 
available  in  1896,  $25,000  in  1897,  $75,000  in  1898  and  $75,000  in  1899. 
Of  like  character  are  the  appropriations  made  for  buildings  at  the 
University  and  at  the  College  of  Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts  in 
the  form  of  special  tax  levies.  They  are  given  for  a series  of  five 
years  each. 


46 


(b)  the  policy  of  permanent  appropriations. 

The  increase  of  standing  appropriations  is  a matter  of  serious  con- 
cern. The  practice  means  an  abandonment  of  what  has  been  and  is 
the  chief  safeguard  of  democratic  institutions.  Modern  constitution- 
al government  rests  upon  the  basic  fact  of  control  of  the  budget.  But 
control  of  the  budget  is  practicable,  effective  and  complete  only  when 
there  is  alert  interest  in  and  keen  discussion  of  the  state’s  expenditures 
at  each  legislative  session  when  the  grants  of  public  funds  are  sought 
for  and  made.  If  the  bulk  of  our  revenues  is  disbursed  year  a^ter 
year  without  the  propriety  of  its  outlay  ever  coming  before  the 
legislature  for  review  and  discussion  there  can  not  thrive  that  active 
interest  in,  and  conscious  and  searching  examination  of  the  budget 
accounts  which  alone  assures  the  best  and  most  economical  outlays. 
If  the  beneficiaries  of  the  state’s  treasury  are  not  compelled  regularly 
not  only  to  exhibit  but  to  explain  to  the  direct  representatives  of  the 
taxpayers  the  amounts  of  their  appropriations,  the  particular  uses 
made  of  them,  the  benefits  resulting  and  to  demonstrate  the  necessities 
that  justify  a renewal  of  the  appropriations  there  is  likely  to  be  en- 
gendered an  indifference  concerning  such  matters.  Under  the  practice 
in  Iowa  it  has  come  about  that  unless  Boards  of  Trustees  take  special 
pride  in  pointing  out  the  particular  benefits  or  advantages  of  past 
appropriations  the  attention  of  the  legislature  is  usually  directed  to 
and  wholly  absorbed  by  the  new  expenditures  desired  by  institutions. 

Not  the  least  significant  fact  about  this  development  in  the  finance 
of  Iowa  is  that  it  reverses  the  practice  of  the  national  governments  of 
practically  all  modern  democratic  states.  We  set  apart  permanent 
appropriations  for  our  institutions  to  the  amount  of  nearly  two  thirds 
of  our  entire  state  budget  while  we  provide  for  all  the  salary  lists  of 
the  executive  and  judicial  branches  by  biennial  appropriations,  all 
terminable  March  81,  the  date  of  the  expiration  of  the  appropriation 
period.  In  the  national  budget  of  Great  Britian  and  of  our  Federal 
Government  the  practice  is  the  opposite.  In  England  about  a third 
of  the  expenditures  are  “permanent”  and  these  relate  to  payments  of 
principal  and  interest  on  the  public  debt,  the  civil  list  (viz.  crown  or 
court  and  the  royalties)  pensions,  salaries,  and  allowances  to  certain 
independent  officers,  courts,  etc.  as  to  which  there  is  no  dispute  or 
liklihood  of  dispute.  All  other  appropriations  are  annual  and  termin- 
ate with  the  fiscal  year  and  it  requires  a new  vote  to  renew  the 
grants.  In  general  the  same  is  true  in  the  practice  of  our  national 
government.  All  appropriations  are  construed  as  annual  “unless  a 
contrary  intention  is  expressed  in  the  act.  ’ ’ There  are  a number  of 
permanent  appropriations  but  relativelv  they  constitute  but  a 
small  part  of  our  total  national  outlays.  In  France  practically  all  ap- 
propriations are  renewed  annually.* 

In  our  national  finance,  as  in  the  British  budget,  the  grounds  for 
permanent  appropriations  seem  to  be  that  the  particular  expenditures 

*See  Adam’s  Finance  pp  153-162;  and  Bastable’s  Public  Finance 
(2nd  Ed. ) pp  698-704. 


47 


are  not  matters  for  discussion,  as  for  example  the  interest  on  the  debt 
or  the  salaries  of  judges  when  once  provided  for,  “where  nothing  is 
left  to  executive  officers  for  examination  or  inquiry  except  to  identify 
the  party  or  to  comply  with  some  specific  duty”  under  an  act;  and 
the  legislature  is  interested,  therefore,  not  in  the  particular  items  but 
in  the  aggregate  amount  that  it  has  been,  or  will  be,  necessary  to  ex- 
pend. All  appropriations  for  temporary  purposes  or  for  officers  or 
undertakings  as  to  which  the  policy  of  the  state  is  not  settled  and 
opinions  vary  as  to  the  advisability  of  outlays  therefor,  all  such  are 
provided  for  by  annual  grants  of  funds. 

The  reasons  urged  in  favor  of  permanent  appropriations  for  an  in- 
stitution may  be  summed  up  in  one  phrase : h’ixity  or  definiteness  of  in- 
come. Those  in  charge  of  an  institution  or  of  any  undertaking  requir- 
ing expenditures  throughout  a series  of  years,  desire  to  know,  and  must 
needs  know,  what  funds  they  can  count  upon  so  they  can  make  the 
proper  apportionment  of  their  funds.  The  outlays  must  be  made 
with  due  regard  to  the  future  needs  as  well  as  to  present  demands. 
Governor  Jno.  H.  Gear  in  his  first  Inaugural  address  stated  succinctly 
the  argument  for  permanent  appropriations  in  urging  such  provision  for 
the  state  University.  “Its  revenues,  ” said  Gov.  Gear,  “are  not  equal 
to  its  requirements, and  it  is  compelled  to  come  before  the  general  as- 
semoly  at  each  session  as  a suppliant  for  pecuniary  aid.  The 
uncertainty  of  the  amount  of  the  appropriations  at  the  hands  of  the 
General  Assembly  renders  it  impossible  for  the  board  of  regents  to 
make  any  definite  and  comprehensive  plan  that  would  under  more 
favorable  pecuniary  conditions  enable  them  year  by  year  to  develop 
the  University  to  its  largest  degree  of  usefulness.  A permanent  ap- 
propriation of  a certain  sum  annually — even  if  it  be  of  small  amount 
— would  accomplish  this  object.  ”(p  10) 

The  legislature  has  adopted  the  policy  urged  by  Governors  Car- 
penter and  Gear,  not  only  for  the  University  but  for  practically 
all  of  the  state’s  institutions;  yet  no  one  can  say  that  their 
anticipations  have  been  fulfilled.*  There  has  been  no  lessening 
in  the  demands  regularly  pressed  on  the  legislature  by  the 
friends  of  the  University  or  of  the  other  schools.  Nor  from  the  very 
nature  of  the  case,  is  there  likely  to  be  any  cessation  or  decrease  of 
such  demands.  Anyone  who  has  observed  the  development  of  schools, 
colleges  and  universities  in  late  years  will  have  noted  the  re- 
markable expansion  that  has  taken  place  in  their  work  and  the  in- 
creased demands  made  upon  such  institutions.  It  is  improbable  that 
these  will  lessen  materially  but  rather  will  increase  for  many  years 

*The  following  excerpts  from  two  official  papers  relative  to  one  of 
the  state’s  institutions  are  instructive:  “The  committee(of  investi- 
gation) justly  censure  the  practice  of  using  funds  of  the  state  institu- 
tions for  paying  lobby  representatives  to  secure  legislative  appropria- 
tions. ” Gov.  Wm.  Larrabee’s  Message,  1890,  p.  21. 

“In  one  instance  at  least  a management  employed  members  of  the 
Board,  at  considerable  expense  to  the  state,  to  attend  assembly 
sessions  to  prevent  the  state  from  enacting  what  was  termed  “hostile 
Legislation.”  Healey  investigating  Committee  Report,  1898,  p 66, 


48 


to  como  ; and  those  in  charge  will  be  constantly  appealing  to  the  legis- 
lature for  increased  appropriations. 

But  granting  that  we  have  reached  the  largest  appropriations  that 
will  be  asked  for  by  our  institutions  it  is  very  questionable  whether 
the  policy  of  relieving  the  authorities  of  our  institutions  from  the 
necessity  of  coming  before  the  legislature  and  explaining  their  work 
and  needs  in  order  to  secure  needed  funds  is  wise  or  not.  When  this 
view  is  analysed  it  will  be  found  that  it  subverts  the  true  relation 
which  institutions  bear,  or  should  bear,  to  the  state  and  to  the 
legislature  which  is  responsible  to  the  people  for  the  conduct  of  the 
state’s  business. 

Our  state  government  is  organized  for  the  purpose  of  transacting 
the  business  that  the  people  of  the  commonwealth  deem  necessary  to 
be  undertaken  by  the  agents  of  the  state.  This  business  should  be 
conducted  in  accordance  with  the  best  business  practice.  Now  the 
legislature,  which  is  the  Board  of  Directors  in  charge  of  the  people’s 
corporate  business,  can  not  properly  discharge  its  duties  or  manage 
the  state’s  afPairs  with  success  unless  its  members  receive  and  can 
command  regularly  and  at  any  time  thoroughgoing  and  complete  in- 
formation respecting  the  work  and  needs  of  the  public  service  from 
the  state’s  agents.  Our  state  institutions  constitute  a part  of  the 
state’s  business.  The  authorites  in  charge  are  agents  of  the  state  in 
carrying  out  the  policies  determined  upon  by  the  legislature.  They 
do  not  represent  corporations  independent  of  the  states  nor  should  they 
be  so  considered.  As  the  heads  of  departments  or  divisions  in  the 
business  of  a railroad  or  large  business  corporation  are  expected  to 
report  annually  to  the  Board  of  Managers  or  to  the  Directors  as  to  the 
expenses  of  management  and  the  results  of  policies  pursued  so  should 
those  at  the^head  of  our  institutions  be  expected  to  report  and  to  set 
out  the  results  of  a period’s  work  so  as  to  justify  future  outlays.  Not 
to  require  those  charged  with  the  superintendence  of  outlays  under 
appropriation  acts  not  only  to  present  at  each  legislative  session  the 
results  of  their  expenditures  but  to  explain  them  orally  to  the  com- 
mittees as  a necessary  preliminary  to  the  renewal,  as  well  as  the 
increase,  of  appropriations  is  unbusinesslike.  No  corporation  can 
conduct  its  business  successfully  unless  the  Directors  require  the 
heads  of  divisions  to  keep  them  constantly  well  informed  as  to  the 
nature  of  their  operations  and  the  reasons  for  pursuing  the  policies 
adopted.  And  it  is  the  highest  business  wisdom  to  compel  them  to 
justify  their  course  annually  before  they  are  given  renewed  authority 
to  continue  their  expenditures.  Failure  to  insist  upon  the  personal 
responsibility  of  the  heads  of  our  institutions  and  their  personal  as- 
sistance to  the  appropriation  committees  at  each  session  from  which 
permanent  appropriations  relieve  them  is  very  unwise  for  many 
reasons,  chief  among  which  is  that  it  tends  to  promote  laxity  in  ad- 
ministration and  laxity  In  appropriations. 

There  is  no  serious  pressure  of  legislative  work  in  our  General 
Assembly  such  as  would  justify  Iowa’s  radical  departure  from  the 
traditional  practice  of  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States.  The 


49 


greatest  number  of  bills  introduced  in  the  House  never  exceeded  700 
and  in  the  Senate  never  above  500  in  the  entire  history  of  the  state. 
So  that  there  is  time  enough  for  the  most  thorough  going  examination 
of  the  financial  needs  of  the  institutions. 

It  will  be  said  doubtless  that  as  a matter  of  fact  the  legislature 
does  not  give  the  time  and  consideration  to  the  institutions  and 
their  needs  that  should  be  given  and  furthermore  it  is  not  probable 
that  there  will  be  any  marked  improvement  in  these  respects.  Con- 
sequently the  authorities  and  friends  of  the  institutions  are  forced  to 
secure  as  much  as  possible  of  their  grants  in  permanent  form  so  as  to 
insure  continuity  of  their  work  and  policies.  No  one  who  is  familiar 
with  our  legislative  piocedure,  the  delays  and  annoyances,  the  polit- 
ical wire  pulling  and  maneuvers,  and  the  disagreeable  conditions  that 
frequently  confront  the  authorties  of  our  institutions  can  deny  the 
force  of  this  contention.  But  it  must  be  conceded,  on  a moment’s 
reflection  that  to  give  up  to  this  tendency  and  continue  the  policy  and 
augment  the  number  and  aggregate  of  our  permanent  appropriations 
because  of  such  legislative  indifference  and  negligence  we  do  not  cor- 
rect this  undesirable  condition  in  our  legislative  practice.  We  simply 
increase  the  evils. 

We  manifestly  cannot  create  a sense  of  legislative  responsibility 
respecting  appropriations  and  encourage  a sharp  scrutiny  of  the  state’s 
budget  by  taking  away  the  very  necessity  for  legislative  consideration 
of  our  institutional  expenditures.  Our  present  policy  in  fact  authorizes 
and  sanctions  indifference  to  such  matters  by  the  members  of  the 
legislature  because  the  appropriations  remain  in  force  whether  they 
pay  any  attention  to  them  or  not  and  unless  the  state  treasury  is  em- 
barrassed for  funds  and  there  is  some  popular  complaint  about  the 
amount  of  the  expenditures  we  may  rest  reasonably  sure  that  but 
little  serious  inspection  will  be  made  of  the  institution  expenditures. 
It  is  only  by  the  opposite  course  that  the  people  can  develop  and 
maintain  a proper  sense  of  responsibility  on  the  part  of  their  repre- 
sentatives in  the  legislature  for  the  use  they  make  of  their  money 
contributed  to  the  state. 

If  all  appropriations  were  known  to  terminate  irrevocably  at  the 
conclusion  of  an  appropriation  period,  coterminate  practically  with 
the  life  of  the  legislature,  and  it  were  necessary  that  each  and  all 
grants  be  renewed  biennially  the  legislature  would  be  compelled  to 
devote  more  attention  to  the  state’s  outlays,  and  the  real  needs  of  the 
public  service.  The  appropriation  committees  would  inquire  more 
particularly  into  the  necessity  for,  or  into  the  desirability  of  appropri- 
ations and  the  heads  and  trustees  of  institutions  would  be  required  to 
justify  the  use  (o  which  had  been  put  an  appropriation  previously 
made  and  to  show  sufficient  cause  for  its  continuance.  This,  it  seems 
to  the  present  writer,  is  simply  tee  common  sense  rule  of  ordinary 
business  practice.  Such  is  the  policy  of  our  Congress  and  of  the 
British  parliament  with  the  bulk  of  the  appropriations  in  their  vast 
national  budgets,  compared  with  which  Iowa’s  biennial  budget  is  but 
a bagatelle.  The  reversal  of  this  traditional  practice  of  Democratic 


50 


states  here  in  Iowa  has  not  been  for  the  best.  The  1 gislatnre  deeds 
away  its  proper  and  its  most  important  power  and  abdicates  its  most 
important  function — that  of  constant  control  and  supervision  of  the 
expenditures  of  the  people’s  money.  The  law  of  biology  that  disuse 
of  functions  induces  atrophy  and  decay  of  muscular  power  and  capacity 
is  just  as  true  in  the  affairs  of  government  and  finance. 

Another  very  important  phase  in  the  legislative  practice  in  mak- 
ing permanent  appropriations  that  should  not  be  overlooked  is  the 
fact  that  the  legislature  in  authorizing  appropriations  that  continue 
beyond  the  term  of  its  own  existence  usurps  the  perogatives  of  suc- 
ceeding assemblies.  Under  Iowa’s  constitution  each  assembly,  al- 
though limited  in  its  powers  by  that  instrument,  is  practically  sov- 
ereign in  its  jurisdiction  so  far  as  concerns  taxation  and  the  appropri- 
ation of  revenue.  Permanent  appropriations  are  within  the  power  of 
any  assembly.  Yet  so  far  as  relates  to  the  offices  and  departments  of 
the  civil  service  and  the  current  support  of  the  institutions  of  the 
state  such  permanent  appropriations  can  be  abrogated  at  any  time  by 
assemblies  which  follow.  But  it  is  not  so  clear  that  it  is  within  the 
range  of  legislative  powers  to  annul  appropriations  under  which  con- 
tracts have  been  entered  into,  say  for  buildings.  Permanent  appro- 
priations, therefore,  besides  being  un  tf^ise  for  reasons  already  given, 
trench  very  seriously  upon  the  rights  of  the  future  assemblies.  Even 
if  in  law  they  do  not  infringe  the  jurisdiction  of  succeeding  legisla- 
tures they  do  in  fact  for  they  hamper  and  embarrass  freedom  of  legis- 
lative action  very  decidedly.  A permanent  grant  or  an  appropriation 
extended  over  several  years,  such  as  the  special  tax  levies  for  the  ed- 
ucational institutions,  give  the  grantees  or  beneficiaries  the  color  of 
a claim  to  a contract  in  pursuance  of  which  they  enter  into  agree- 
ments and  undertake  plans  that  they  insist  it  would  be  unjust  to  dis- 
turb or  render  impossible.  With  the  weight  of  this  presumption  thus 
in  the  favor  of  such  appropriations  subsequent  legislatures  are  loath 
to  disturb  things  so  established  or  undertakings  entered  into.  Hence 
the  desire  of  those  concerned  to  secure  permanent  grants : and  hence 
the  undesirability  of  such  a financial  practice  from  the  standpoint  of 
legislative  and  popular  control  of  the  state’s  expenditures.  The  growth 
of  this  practice  in  Iowa’s  finance  has  not  taken  place  without  some 
objection.  For  more  than  a decade  prior  to  1878  a permanent  and 
fixed  annual  appropriation  was  strenuously  urged  on  behalf  of  the 
University  but  the  legislature  was  averse.* 

When  opposition  was  overcome  in  1878  a minority  of  the  Senate 
committee  on  Appropriations  declared  pointedly  that  the  institution 
had  “no  such  prior  claim  upon  the  funds  of  the  state,  as  to  entitle  it 
to  a first  lien  upon  the  treasury  for  all  future  time,  and  it  is  neither 
wise  nor  necessary  for  this  General  Assembly  to  bind  the  people  of 
the  state  to  pay  an  annual  sum  to  this  institution  regardless  of  its 
necessities,  and  of  tne  ability  of  the  state  to  contribute  to  its  support, 

*See  in  particular  the  discussion  in  the  House  in  1870,  for  instance 
the  remarks  of  Messrs  Mills,  Teale  and  Cutts,  March  1,  as  reported 
in  the  Legislative  Supplement  of  the  Des  Moines  Bulletin,  No.  25. 


51 


and  such  action  would  be  a departure  from  the  settled  policy  of  the 
state.”  (S.  J.  p 392.)  The  objections  to  special  tax  levies  seem  to 
have  been  deemed  more  important ; for  although  this  form  of  appro- 
priation was  urged  for  the  University  as  early  as  1866,  it  was  not 
until  thirty  years  later  that  a special  tax  was  authorized.  Respecting 
this  policy  the  Report  of  the  Investigating  Committee  in  1898  expresses 
disapproval  in  explicit  terms. 

“The  precedent  of  creating  tax  levies  for  state  institutions”  it  says, 
“should  not  be  followed,  as  it  gives,  under  present  managements  and 
conditions,  a discretion  in  expenditures  that  detracts  too  much  from 
legislative  powers  and  functions.  The  precedent  of  one  legislature 
making  appropriations  for  a period  longer  than  two  years  and  which 
are  to  be  expended  after  the  succeeding  legislature  convenes,  cannot 
meet  the  sanction  of  him  who  is  cognizant  of  the  uncertainties,  dan- 
gers, and  abuses  of  thus  anticipating  the  needs  and  revenues  of  the 
future  by  indirectly  effecting  the  legislation  of  another  general 
assembly.”  (pp  67-68. ) 

(6)  THE  DISPOSAL  OF  UNEXPENDED  BALANCES. 

One  of  the  vexed  questions  in  public  finance,  or  rather  one  of  the 
perplexing  problems  in  the  actual  financial  practice  of  states,  is  the 
disposal  of  unexpended  or  unused  balances  of  appropriations.  The 
legislature  cannot  always  forsee  the  exact  amount  of  money  that  will 
be  necessary  to  accomplish  a particular  purpose.  The  appropriations 
in  the  majority  of  cases  are  necessarily  based  on  estimates  that  ap- 
proximate the  actual  amount  required.  When  the  object  sought 
is  attained  there  may  be  something  left  over.  There  immediately 
arises  the  question  with  the  financial  officers  of  the  state  , what  shall 
be  done  with  this  remnant,  so  to  speak. 

Shall  such  unexpended  appropriations  be  turned  back  into  the 
treasury,  or  be  charged  off  the  Auditor’s  and  Treasurer’s  books  as  no 
longer  available?  Or  shall  this  balance  continue  to  be  a part  of  the 
available  funds  of  an  institution  or  department?  Again  if  a fund  is 
not  used  at  all  within  a reasonable  time,  say  two  years  after  the 
expiration  of  the  life  of  the  legislature  authorizing  it,  or  is  only 
partially  used,  shall  those  entitled  to  the  appropriation  be  permitted 
to  draw  on  the  fund  until  it  is  exhausted  regardless  of  the  lapse  of 
time?  In  other  words  shall  the  bookkeeping  of  the  state  be  cumbered 
with  a large  and  constantly  increasing  assortment  of  odds  and  ends  of 
unexpended  balances  of  appropriations  with  the  host  of  varying  an- 
noyances and  controversies  which  they  inevitably  engender  or  shall 
there  be  a definite  and  stated  appropriation  period  at  the  expiration  of 
which  all  unexpended  appropriations  lapse  the  balances  to  be  charged 
off  and  new  grants  made  necessary  if  the  same  are  deemed  essential 
to  the  public  service? 

These  questions  will  doubtless  appear  to  many  to  involve  nothing 
more  than  mere  technical  problems  in  the  routine  of  the  state’s  book- 
keeping and  of  no  particular  consequence,  therefore,  in  the  matter  of 
legislative  control  and  supervision  of  the  budget.  The  contrary,  how- 


52 


ever,  is  true.  Of  but  little  less  importance,  so  far  as  relates  to  popu- 
lar control  of  public  expenditures,  is  this  matter  of  the  disposal  of 
unexpended  balances.  The  practice  in  the  finance  of  Iowa  as  regards 
them  has  been  variable,  and  not  always  in  accordance  with  the  sound 
principles  of  safe  finance. 

During  the  first  twenty  years  of  the  state’s  history  the  appropri- 
ation acts  in  but  few  instances  recognized  the  possibility  that  there 
might  be  a portion  of  the  funds  that  would  not  be  needed.  They  were 
all  specific,  irrevocable  and  unconditional  grants.  In  the  Omnibus 
appropriation  act  of  1851  a paragraph  granting  $1,000  for  the  Peni- 
tentiary contained  the  clause  “or  so  much  as  may  be  needed  for  such 
purposes.’’  (ch.  XCI. ) But  prior  to  1860  there  is  no  other  similar 
provision  affecting  institutional  appropriations.  In  1860  the  appro- 
priation for  the  Blind  Asylum  at  Vinton  contains  such  a clause  (ch. 
89. ) From  that  time  forward  the  occurence  of  this  limitation  be- 
comes more  frequent  until  the  words  “or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be 
necessary’’  are  almost  invariably  present  in  the  acts. 

In  the  appropriation  for  the  penitentiary  in  1864  the  legislature 
not  only  recognized  the  probability  of  a surplus  or  balance  that  wculd 
be  unused  but  authorized  that  “said  surplus  may  be  used  for  the 
completion  of  any  one  “or  all’’  of  the  items  mentioned  in  the  act. 
(ch. 71)  A similar  provision  was  contained  in  the  appropriation  for  the 
Agricultural  College  in  1868,  a surplus  under  any  clause  giving  a 
grant  could  be  utilized  to  make  up  a deficiency  in  any  other  grant 
(ch.  81).  From  1870  forward  the  appropriations  for  the  Hospital  at 
Mt.  Pleasant  contained  such  provisions  very  frequently  (see  ch.  96, 
1870,  ch.  126,  1876,  ch.  86,  1882,  and  ch.  108,  1884)  and  now  and  then 
in  the  appropriations  for  other  institutions.  In  the  first  report  of  the 
Board  of  Control  it  is  urged  that  the  Board  be  given  general  author- 
ity to  expend  unused  balances  for  any  purpose  deemed  necessary  for 
an  institution  (p  84)  and  their  recommendation  was  incorporated  in 
the  Act  of  1900  making  provision  for  the  extraordinary  expenditures 
for  the  institution  under  their  jurisdiction,  (ch.  150). 

It  was  not  until  1876  in  the  general  appropriation  for  salaries  and 
clerical  expenses  of  the  state  officers  that  the  disposal  of  undrawn 
balances  of  appropriations  by  charging  them  off  the  books  of  the 
Auditor  and  Treasurer  of  State,  or  as  the  phrase  is  “covered  back 
into  the  treasury”  was  formally  required  by  law.  (ch.  142,  1876.) 
But  it  is  very  likely  that  the  enactment  simply  gave  legal  sanction 
to  what  had  been  the  custom  of  the  state  accounting  officers  for  years 
prior  thereto.  In  1882  in  an  appropriation  for  the  Blind  Asylum  it 
was  the  .first  time  formally  ordered  that  any  undrawn  or  unused 
balances  should  be  turned  back  into  the  treasury.  (Laws  ch.  6.) 
But  aside  from  this  one  instance  there  appears  to  have  been  no  definite 
provision  concerning  the  disposal  of  undrawn  or  unused  balances  of 
institutional  appropriations  prior  to  the  Act  of  1900  to  be  discussed 
later. 

From  the  very  nature  of  the  case  notwithstanding  the  subject  of 
unused  balanoes  was  unnoticed  in  the  statutes  it  protruded  itself 


persistently  in  the  practical  financial  operations  of  the  state.  Nearly 
all  of  the  support  funds  of  the  institutions  were  limited  to  certain 
amounts  per  capita  per  month  or  quarter  “or  so  much  thereof  as 
may  be  necessary.”  For  the  most  part  both  heads  of  institutions  and 
the  Auditor  of  State  regarded  these  as  annual  rather  t)mn  monthly  or 
quarterly  appropriations,  (see  Attorney  Generals  Opinions  1899  p 
83)and  the  Auditor  was  accustomed  to  charge  off  his  book  all  amounts 
undrawn  at  the  end  of  the  general  biennial  appropriation  period  viz : 
March  31  of  the  years  of  the  legislative  session,  although  there  was 
no  specific  warrant  of  law  for  his  so  doing.  Controversies  now  and 
then  arose  but  the  institution  authorities  soon  got  into  the  habit  of 
drawing  out  the  entire  amount  allowable  per  quarter  so  that  there 
would  be  little  or  no  balance  to  charge  off.  (See  Report  of  Healey 
Committee  1898  p 13)  The  most  annoying  differences  would  arise  over 
the  balances  of  specific,  extraordinary  appropriations  that  continued 
partially  undrawn  for  years,  the  amounts  being  carried  by  the  Audi- 
tor until  he  Would  conclude  that  there  would  be  no  call  for  it  and 
charge  the  amount  off  only  to  have  some  one  years  afterwards  come 
forward  with  a peremptory  demand  lor  the  appropriation. 

When  the  Code  of  1897  took  effect  and  again  when  the  Board  of 
Control  Act  became  operative  there  ensued  several  disagreements  tha 
exhibited  the  perplexities  attendant  upon  the  disposition  of  unex 
pended  balances  when  the  law  fails  to  give  clear  directions. 

Under  the  new  Code,  in  force  October  1,  1897,  it  was  held  by  the 
Attorney  General  that  undrawn  appropriations  limited  to  “so  much 
thereof  as  was  necessary”  for  the  Agricultural  College  lapsed  on  that 
date,  the  Code  creating  a new  annual  appropriation  period  beginning 
with  that  date.  (Opinion  of  Atty.  Gen.  1898  p 369).  The  next  legis- 
lature reappropriated  the  balances  (ch.  164,  1898.)  An  extremely  ani- 
mated controversy  arose  between  the  Secretary  of  the  University 
and  the  Auditor  over  the  latter’s  refusal  to  allow  the  undrawn  balance 
to  be  disbursed  following  the  Attorney  General’s  ruling  in  the  former 
case  (see  Brief,  Nov.  1.  1900,  and  Notes  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Uni- 
versity April  29,  1901. ) Much,  perhaps  all  of  the  controversy  in  all 
of  these  instances  was  due  to  the  simple  oversight  in  making  provision 
for  the  transition  to  the  new  Code  and  not  probably  to  any  intention 
to  cut  off  the  institutions  affected  bv  the  recodification. 

When  the  Board  of  Control  Act  became  operative  July  1,  1898  there 
was  a radical  change  in  the  method  of  disbursing  funds.  All  funds 
or  balances  thereof  in  the  hands  of  the  local  treasurers  were  transferr- 
ed to  the  Treasurer  of  State  at  Des  Moines  who  thereafter  acted  as 
the  treasurer  for  all  of  the  institutions  under  the  Board.  The  question 
of  the  disposal  of  balances  Immediately  protruded  itself.  The  situ- 
ation was  complicated  by  the  fact  that  while  the  Treasurer  of  State 
acted  in  a aual  capacitv  the  former  appropriations  for  support  contin- 
ued unchanged  and  disbursements  thereof  occurred  monthly  subsequent 
to  the  auditing  of  institution  bills  and  not  prior  as  was  formerly  the 
case  with  most  of  the  institutions.  As  Treasurer  of  the  Institutions 


54 


he  was  subject  to  the  directions  of  the  Board  but  before  he  could 
comply  he  had  as  Treasurer  of  State  to  pass  upon  or  rather  to  deter- 
mine, whether  he  would  honor  warrants  of  the  Auditor  drawn  to  meet 
the  bills  certified  to  by  the  Board. 

At  the  outset  it  was  assumed  that  the  appropriations  for  support, 
although  they  were  each  to  be  reckoned  upon  the  average  monthly  or 
quarterly  attendance  at  the  institutions  were  in  effect  annual  appro- 
priations. The  Board  of  Control  took  the  fiscal  year  beginning  July 
1,  1898  when  its  responsibility  began,  as  the  annual  period.  The 
Auditor’s  office  took  the  year  beginning  with  the  Code,  Oct.  1,  1897. 

The  Treasurer  inclined  to  the  former,  at  least  so  made  the  entries 
in  his  books.  At  the  close  of  the  fiscal  biennum  ending  June  30,  1899 
there  were  undrawn  balances  in  the  support  funds  asrgregating  |119, 
384.69,  (see  Treasurers  Report,  1899  p LXIV)  due  to  the  efficient  and 
economical  administration  of  the  Board  in  the  purchase  and  use  of 
supplies.  As  all  of  the  support  funds  were  appropriable  only  to  such 
an  extent  as  were  “necessary”  the  Treasurer  began  in  due  course  to 
charge  off  such  balances ; but  he  soon  learned  that  the  Board  of  Con- 
trol had  not  done  so  and  furthermore  did  not  concede  such  disposal  to 
be  proper  or  permissible.  It  was  also  shown  that  the  College  for  the 
Blind  at  Vinton  and  the  School  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  at  Council 
Bluffs  would  be  subject  to  serious  and  incalculable  embarrassment  if 
he  refused  to  honor  warrants  drawn  on  such  balances  as  the  Board 
had  to  the  credit  of  those  institutions.  The  Auditor’s  office  agreed 
with  the  Treasurer  although  no  balances  had  actually  been  charged 
off  by  him.  The  Treasurer  appealed  to  the  Attorney  General  for  a 
ruling  so  that  the  books  of  the  three  departments  could  be  harmonized 
but  before  this  was  rendered  the  legislature  convened. 

The  Treasurer  notified  the  Board  that  while  he  held  the  law  to  be 
clear  and  that,  even  if  there  was  no  express  warrant  for  charging  off 
the  balances,  they  were  nevertheless  unavailable  for  the  institution, 
he  woul4  on  his  own  financial  responsibility  honor  warrants  on  such 
balances  until  the  adjournment  of  the  Assembly  in  the  hope  that  the 
legislature  would  either  reappropriate  the  balances  or  otherwise  make 
permanent  provision  respecting  the  duties  of  the  accounting  officers 
respecting  their  disposal.  A bill  was  drawn  by  a member  of  the 
Board  giving  it  complete  control  over  balances  and  introduced.  Late 
in  the  session  the  writer  at  the  suggestion  of  the  chainnan  of  the 
Senate  commitree  on  Appropriations,  drafted  a bill  nroviding  for  a 
general  appropriation  period  of  two  years,  giving  all  boards  or  insti- 
tutional authorities  absolute  power  over  all  balances  during  such 
period,  but  requiring  that  all  balances  unexpended  at  its  conclusion 
March  31,  should  be  charged  off  subject  to  unpaid  bills  due  but  not 
present  at  the  time.  For  specific  extraordinary  appropriations  two 
years  additional  were  given.  Owing  to  the  lateness  of  the  session  and 
the  opposition  of  the  Board  of  Control  the  bill  was  not  formally 
presented  or  pressed  for  consideration  although  its  principle  and  plan 
were  quite  generally  approved  by  members  with  whom  it  was  can„ 


vassed.*  The  present  law  was  passed  giving  the  Board  of  Control 
unlimited  and  perpetual  power  over  the  disposal  of  unexpended 
balances.  (Oh.  3 ) 

This  matter  has  been  presented  in  such  detail  in  order  that  the 
nature  of  the  problem  may  be  fuLly  appreciated  and  the  significance 
of  the  question  realized.  For,  in  the  writer’s  opinion  the  practice  in 
Iowa  has  not  conformed  with  the  best  financial  policy  and  the  law  of 
1900  giving  away  perpetual  control  of  the  balances  to  our  great  ad- 
ministrative board  is  not  merely  unwise,  it  is  a dangerous  departure 
from  the  true  course  of  constitutional  government  and  democratic 
control  of  public  expenditares. 

Various  investigations  prior  to"^1898  in  nearly  each  case  developed 
the  fact  that  the  authorities  of  the  institutions  were  far  from  scrupu- 
lous in  the  use  of  funds  for  purposes  other  than  those  specified  by  law 
and  they  were  not  averse  to  using  balances  for  any  purpose  deemed 
urgent.  The  practice  was  productive  of  many  evils  not  the  least  of 
which  was  disrespect  for  legislative  directions  as  to  the  purposes  and 
plans  for  the  expenditure  of  public  funds,  and  it  must  be  obvious 
that  such  was  necessarily  the  result  of  such  a practice.  Now  while 
we  make  it  legal  and  proper  lo  thus  use  balances  do  we  act  wisely  in 
giving  officials  absolute  and  perpetual  power  to  dispose  of  the  balances 
as  they  may  see  fit?  It  seems  to  me  very  questionable.  We  must  not 
let  the  brilliant  success  of  our  Board  of  Control  and  the  present 
widespread  confidence  of  the  people  in  the  ability  and  integrity  of  the 
Board  blind  us  to  the  dangers  that  result  from  placing  all  sorts  of 
power  in  the  hands  of  administrative  agents  with  little  or  no  restric- 
tion thereon. 

Those  representing  the  institutions  will  contend  that  to  cut  off 
all  balances  of  the  support  funds  at  the  end  of  a biennial  period 
would  not  encourage  economy,  that  it  would  not  permit  them  to  fol- 
low their  present  method  of  expending  only  so  much  each  month  as 
is  actually  needed,  but  would  rather  induce  unnecessary  or  more 
generous  outlays.  Further  they  contend  strenuously  that  the  institu- 
tions might  be  embarrassed  in  the  first  months  of  the  ensuing  period 

*The  data  upon  which  the  above  sketch,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the 
disposition  of  unexpended  balances  under  the  present  statutes,  is 
based,  consists  of  the  letter  of  the  Treasurer  of  State,  Mr.  John 
Herriott,  to  the  Attorney  General  Mr.  Milton  Remley  under  date  of 
Dec.  22,  1899,  the  letter  of  the  Board  of  Control,  by  Judge  L.  G. 
Kinne,to  the  Treasurer  of  State,  dated  Feb.  17,  1900,  the  letter  of  the 
Treasurer  of  State  to  the  Board  of  Control,  dated  Feb.  19.  the  draft 
of  the  Bill  referred  to  in  the  text,  and  the  letter  of  the  Board  of  Con- 
trol by  .Judge  Kinue,  dated  March  20,  1900,  to  Hon,  Warren  Garst,  the 
Chairman  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Appropriations.  None  of  the 
foregoing  have  ever  appeared  in  print. 

It  was  not  for  a year  and  a half  afterwards  wliile  pursuing  his 
investigations  in  the  writing  of  this  study  that  the  writer  discov- 
ed  that  the  provisions  which  he  had  included  in  the  bill  referred  to 
above  were  enacted  into  law  by  Congress  in  1870  and  in  1874  and 
now  govern  the  Treasury  Departments.  See  Holies  Financial  History 
of  the  United  States,  1861-1865,  pp  528-513. 


56 


if  prices  should  suddenly  go  up  or  by  reason  of  some  unforseen  con- 
tingeny  the  supplies  of  an  institution  should  be  cut  off. 

The  first  objection,  it  seems  to  me,  is  without  substance.  Two 
years  of  complete  control  over  balances  allows  ample  time  for  the 
exercise  of  wise  discretion  and  economy  in  the  expenditure  of  funds. 
If  authorities  can  not  or  will  not  be  as  economical  as  possible  or  to 
state  it  differently,  keep  down  expenses  to  the  lowest  level  compat- 
ible with  efficiency  in  a period  of  two  years,  they  can  not  or  will  not 
be  so  if  they  are  given  a longer  or  unlimited  control  over  the  disposal 
of  balances. 

The  second  objection  fails  to  consider,  (1)  that  for  two  years  in- 
stitutional authorities  can  only  use  up  to  the  limit  of  their  maxi- 
mum allowance  for  support  and  no  more,  and  they  can  draw  all  of 
this  at  any  time:(2)  that  if  on  account  of  failure  of  crops  or  of  a 
sudden  rise  in  prices  there  is  a prospect  of  a shortage  of  supplies  in 
the  first  months  following  the  termination  of  the  appropriation  period 
they  can  make  larger  purchases  in  anticipation  of  such  a contingency 
in  the  closing  month  of  the  expiring  period:  (3)  that  the  legislature 
is  in  session  at  the  time  and  if  the  prospective  embarrassment  is 
brought  to  the  attention  of  that  body  provision  can  be  made  for 
meeting  it:  and  (4)  that  the  Code  provides  (sec.  186)  for  the  incurring 
of  an  indebtedness  by  the  authorities  of  our  institutions  when  the 
support  funds  are  insufficient  and  the  inmates  are  in  immanent  danger 
of  suffering  in  consequence.  It  is  not  possible  under  the  plan  here 
urged  for  the  institutions  to  suffer  any  embarrassment  to  which  they 
are  not  subjected  under  our  present  method  of  unlimited  adminis- 
trative control  of  unused  balances. 

With  respect  to  balances  of  extraordinary  appropriations,  if  not 
used  within  four  years  from  the  date  available,  they  ought  on  gener- 
al principles  to  be  charged  oft*  the  books  of  the  state.  The  legislature 
should  not  for  reasons  apparent,  sanction  appropriations  the  need  for 
which  is  not  immediate,  that  is  within  at  least  two  years.  Circum- 
stances may  interfere  so  as  to  render  impracticable  or  unwise  their 
expenditure  but  if  four  years  elapse  before  use  is  made  of  the  grant 
it  is  manifest  that  the  appropriation  should  not  have  been  made. 
Where  they  are  charged  off  and  the  object  is  deemed  important  or 
urgent  they  can  easily  be  re-appropriated.  But  it  is  assuredly  not 
conducive  to  careful  a,ppropriations  and  lucid  budget  estimates  to  let 
balances  of  useless  funds  pile  up  to  the  obstruction  of  clear  statements 
and  the  confusion  of  the  members  of  the  legislature  not  familiar  with 
previous  legislation. 

There  should  be  the  same  clear  cut  periods  and  sharp  seperation  of 
the  appropriations  of  such  periods  in  dealing  with  the  state’s  finance 
that  prevail  in  the  financial  practice  of  our  great  industrial  corpora- 
tions. The  state’s  business  and  bookeeping  should  be  brought  square 
to  a base  line,  so  to  speak,  every  year  or  so,  and  a fresh  start  and  a 
new  balance  sheet  taken  so  that  all  concerned,  the  administration  and 
the  tax  paying  public  as  well  as  the  legislature,  may  know  exactly  the 
precise  condition  of  all  funds  and  the  prospects  for  income  and  outgo 


57 


or  the  period  taken,  and  this  is  not  assured  when  the  legisalture 
permits  balances  to  cumber  the  state’s  ledgers  year  in  an  year  out. 
Under  most,  if  not  all,  constitutional  governments  except  the  Ameri- 
can states  the  fiscal  period  is  only  for  one  year*.  The  books  are 
closed,  the  balances  in  due  course  are  charged  otf,  and  if  needed 
again  they  are  reappropriated.  This  is  the  practice  of  our  national 
government  and  of  the  governments  of  Great  Britain  and  France. 

As  was  pointed  out  in  discussing  the  advisability  of  permanent 
ppropriations  the  legsilature  should  review  thoroughly  and  in  detail 
the  state’s  expenditures  at  each  regular  legislative  session.  It 
should  know  not  only  what  has  been  spent  but  exactly  what  may 
thereafter  be  expended  under  existing  appropriations.  Now  there 
is  nothing  that  is  so  likely  to  be  over  looked,  or  if  noticed  their  import- 
ance underrated,  as  unexpended  balances.  The  estimates  may  be 
seriously  perverted  by  their  presence.  If  they  are  reckoned  as  prob- 
able expenditures  and  are  not  drawn  for  a great  length  of  time  they 
may  bring  about  a large  surplus  in  the  treasury.  On  the  other  hand  if 
they  are  not  included  in  the  estimates  the  treasury  may  be  embarrassed 
by  demands  for  their  disbursement  at  times  when  fund  are  low.  But 
of  more  importance  is  the  fact  that  the  legislature  in  giving  over 
such  permanent  control  to  administrative  officers  increases  the  op- 
portunity for  laxity  in  making  appropriations.  When  we  permit  a 
board  to  use  an  unexpended  balance  for  another  purpose  or  object  we 
in  effect  increase  the  appropriation  for  the  second  object  or  we  may 
make  a new  one  outright.  It  may  happen,  as  it  has  frequently  in 
our  congressional  finance,  that  the  legislature  will  be  under  the  im- 
pression that  a grant  is  only  for  a certian  sum  as  set  out  in  a proposed 
act  when  in  fact  there  may  be  two  or  three  times  the  amount  author- 
izzed  because  sundry  miscelaneous  balances  may  be  bunched  and  also 
used  for  the  furtherance  of  the  same  object.  Such  elasticity  in  leg- 
slative  provisions  does  not  encourage  legislative  responsibility  for 
expenditures  or  secure  greater  administrative  care  and  accounability 
in  the  application  of  public  funds. 

The  experience  of  American  states  has  very  generally  tended  to 
biennial  fiscal  periods  as  well  as  biennial  legislative  and  administra- 
tive terms,  and  it  is  generally  conceded  that  under  present  conditions 
and  tendencies  biennial  sessions  of  the  legislature  are  preferable  to 
annual. 


*Speaking  of  the  length  of  fiscal  periods  Professor  Bastable  uses  the 
following  language : 

“Some  of  the  smaller  German  States  have  biennial  or  even  (as  in 
Hesse)  triennial  budgets,  an  ire  possible  system  in  any  country  with 
active  constitutional  life,  and  one  which  will  be  adandoned  as  the 
popular  element  becomes  stronger.  ’ ’ 


) 


I 


.S. 


